Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)

1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking to restrain the respondent No.2 from passing any order with respect to the review petition filed by respondent No.1.

2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner and respondent No.1 had entered into a contract for work of SG Area, Civil Work Package, Unit 5 & 6 Stage-II, Phase-I (2X500 MW) and Main Plant Civil Work Package Unit-7, Stage-II, Phase-II, (1X500 MW) respectively. He states that disputes arose between the parties and a reference was made to an Arbitrator under the Permanent Machinery of Arbitration (PMA) Scheme in accordance with OM dated 12th June, 2013.

"The Appellate Authority will have the power to revise his/her own decision for rectification of any error or for editorial corrections etc."

10. In the opinion of this Court, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 deals not only with pendency of arbitration proceedings but also with pre and post arbitration awards. This Court is also of the view that the petitioner would have sufficient opportunity to challenge whatever decision is taken by Mr. Dinesh Bhardwaj, in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Further, the fact that PMA is an Alternative Dispute Resolution cannot be lost sight of. Consequently, the writ petition and the application are dismissed.