Court No. - 4
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4841 of 2019 Petitioner :- Executive Engineer Electricity Urban Distribution Division Respondent :- District Judge District Allahabad And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivam Yadav,Mahboob Ahmad
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner.
It appears that respondent no. 2 has made excess payment to the petitioner for the use of electricity for which he has demanded refund. As there was a dispute, therefore, the matter was referred to the Arbitrator, who passed an award on 18.8.2005 against the petitioner.
The petitioner, thereafter, submitted an objection under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as "Act") in Case No. 69 of 2008 before the District Judge, Allahabad which was rejected by the District Judge, Allahabad by order dated 25.11.2017. The petitioner, thereafter, preferred First Appeal From Order (Defective) No. 508 of 2018 with Delay Condonation Application and, after condonation of delay, the appeal has been allotted regular number 548 of 2019.
The respondent no. 2 has put the award in execution and in pursuance thereof, the account of the petitioner has been attached.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has come up in the writ petition with the following prayer:
"I. Issue order or direction, direct the respondent no. 1 i.e. District Judge, District Allahabad to forthwith release the Bank Account of the petitioner corporation i.e. Punjab National Bank, Civil Lines, Allahabad bearing Account No. 0012005500003930 from the attachment orders, which was passed on 04.05.2019/30.05.2019.
II. Issue order or direction, direct the respondent no. 1, not to initiate any recovery during the pendency of the F.A.F.O. No. 548 of 2019 (Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division Vs. M/s Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd.) before this Hon'ble Court.
III. Issue order or direction, direct the respondent no. 1 to acknowledge and allow the petitioner to furnish a Bank Guarantee against the decreetal amount and to not to en-cash it, until the final disposal of F.A.F.O. No. 548 of 2019 (Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution Division Vs. M/s Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd.)."
However, during the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner pressed only prayer no. 3. The award passed by the arbitrator has been affirmed by the District Judge, Allahabad under Section 34 of the Act, and the petitioner has failed to obtain any interim order from this Court in First Appeal From Order preferred by him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of attachment of the account, salary of the staff, payment of daily labourers/employees for urgent works, payment of taxes and any other contingent work/requirement could not be made which is causing a lot of hardship to the petitioner as well as to the public at large.
In view of the aforesaid fact, the petitioner may approach the concerned court where the recovery proceeding is pending placing his hardship and may press the prayer no. 3, and the concerned court may consider the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petitioner is disposed off.
Order Date :- 10.6.2019 Ishan