1. Learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for the respondent have jointly submitted that the dispute, controversy, and the issue involved in present petition are covered by the decision dated 11.4.2012 passed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.1997 of 2011 and allied matters.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner and respondent have jointly submitted that present petition also may be remanded to the State Level Industry Facilitation Council (hereinafter referred to as the "Council") constituted under Section 21 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise Development Act 2006. One of the main contention on which the petitioner has challenged in the impugned order is violation of principles of natural justice.
3. The petitioner has also claimed that it had submitted application under Section 8 of the said Act which has not been considered and decided by the Council before passing impugned order. A copy of the order dated 11.4.2012 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.1997 of 2011 and allied matters is placed on record. The Division Bench has in paragraph Nos. 7 and 8 of the said order observed that:-
"7.
In view of this statement made by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the submissions made before the council, in their written argument or in the letter, wherein it is stated that conciliation proceedings have failed and the next step has to be conducted by the council. Before conducting the next step for arbitration, council has to decide the application filed by the appellant dated 5.11.2009 under section 8 of the Act and after deciding it and serving a copy of the order on the appellant, thereafter, shall proceed to fix the date for parties to lead the evidence in support of respective claims and thereafter fix the date for hearing after giving sufficient notice to the parties and thereafter proceed to pass arbitral award in accordance with law. The learned Single Judge has dismissed Special Civil Application No. 2471 of 2011 on the ground of alternative remedy. In our opinion, the order passed by the learned Single Judge cannot be maintained as the council proceeded to pronounce the award without following proper procedure and without recording a finding that conciliation proceedings have failed and come to an end and further the council failed to decide the application of the appellant under Section 8 of the Act. The learned Single Judge has committed an error in not deciding the matter on merits and in dismissing the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy. The order passed by the learned Single Judge suffers from the error apparent on the face of the record and therefore, it cannot be maintained. Therefore, the award passed by the council dated 21.8.2010 is illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside.
8. In the result, this Appeal succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 21.8.2010 passed by the council is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the council to proceed with the arbitration proceedings and after serving a copy of the same on the appellant, thereafter, shall proceed to fix the date for parties to lead the evidence in support of respective claims and thereafter fix the date for hearing after giving sufficient notice to the parties and thereafter proceed to pass arbitral award in accordance with law. The order dated 11.10.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.1997 of 2011 is set aside. It shall be open to the parties to raise all objections which have been raised in this Appeal and the writ petition which they want to raise before the counsel. The council shall decide the application dated 5.11.2009 preferred by appellant under section 8 of the Act as expeditiously as possible. As the Appeal is allowed, Civil Application does not survive."
4. In light of the said joint submission by the learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for respondent present petition is remitted to the Council to proceed in the subject matter in accordance with the relevant and applicable provisions of the Act.
5. In view of the joint submission by both the sides below mentioned order is passed.
In light of the joint request and with consent of the learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for the respondent the order dated 21.8.2010 passed by the Council is set aside on the ground that it suffers from the violation of principles of natural justice and that the application filed by petitioner under Section 8 of the Act is not considered.
The petition is remitted to the Council.
The Council will proceed to hear and decide the matter in accordance with relevant and applicable provision, after hearing the parties and pass speaking and reasoned order as expeditiously as possible.
It is clarified that the contentions and objections on part of the petitioner as well as respondent are open and it will be permissible to both sides to raise the contentions available in law at the time of hearing before the Council.
With the aforesaid clarification and observation the petition is disposed of.
Suresh* (K.M.THAKER,J.) Top