M/S Mecon Ltd. vs Jharkhand Micro And Small Scale ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4357 Jhar

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               W.P.(C) No. 3514 of 2021

M/s Mecon Ltd., Doranda, Ranchi through its General Manager
(Contracts), Shri Debabrata Acharya     ...    ...     Petitioner
                               Versus
1. Jharkhand Micro and Small Scale Enterprises Facilitation Council
   through the Under Secretary-cum-Member Secretary, Ranchi
2. N.P. Construction through its Proprietor Pramod Singh, Chas,
   Bokaro                               ...    ...     Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
                         -----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate For the Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate

-----

Order No. 04 Dated: 23.11.2021

Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, while arguing the case, has raised the jurisdictional issue particularly on the point that work orders were issued to the respondent no. 2 from the year 2005 to 2009 and different invoices were raised by it between the year 2011 and 2013, whereas the petitioner got registered under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 2006") in the year 2016 and hence, the respondent no. 2 could not have taken recourse of the provisions of the Act, 2006. In support of his submission, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner puts reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of "Silpi Industries Etc. Vs. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Anr." reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 439. It is thus submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that initiation of proceeding by Jharkhand Micro and Small Scale Enterprises Facilitation Council, Ranchi is itself without jurisdiction.

Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Caveator/respondent no. 2, submits that work order no. 11.51.E24G/Erection-Refr./SR-001/8319 dated 01.10.2008 has been amended by the petitioner on 24.10.2017 and hence, it cannot be said that the petitioner could not have taken recourse of the Act, 2006 claiming due payment and to take recourse before the Jharkhand Micro and Small Scale Enterprises Facilitation Council. It is also submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the Caveator/respondent no. 2 that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy against the order/award as contained in memo no. 1630 dated 24.08.2021 passed by the Jharkhand Micro and Small Scale Enterprises Facilitation Council by filing an objection under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Moreover, the petitioner is bound to comply the provisions of Section 19 of the Act, 2006 so as to maintain the present writ petition before this Court. He, however, prays for four weeks' time to seek instruction and file counter affidavit.

In view of the said prayer, put up this case under the heading "For Admission" after four weeks.

I.A. No. 5515 of 2021 filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief shall be considered at an appropriate stage.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish