Primary Agriculture Credit ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13197 MP

                                                          1
                           IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT GWALIOR
                                                   BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                             ON THE 14 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                           WRIT PETITION No. 18251 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT COOPERATIVE
                          SOCIETY MARYADIT MUHASA THROUGH     ITS
                          MANAGER RAMSWAROOP NARWARIYA MUHASA
                          TEHSIL   KHANIYADHANA DISTRICT SHIVPURI
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI RAGHVENDRA DIXIT - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
                                SECRETARY     THROUGH      COOPERATIVE
                                DEPARTMENT     VINDHAYACHAL    BHAWAN
                                BHOPAL MP (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    MADHYA   PRADESH    STATE CO OPERATIVE
                                MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, SHIVPURI
                                THROUGH ITS DISTRICT MARKETING OFFICER
                                NEAR OF JAL MANDIR, MARRIAGE GARDEN,
                                SHASTRI  COLONY,    SHIVPURI  (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          3.    MANAGING DIRECTOR, MADHYA PRADESH
                                STATE CO OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION
                                LIMITED, HEAD OFFICE, JHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL
                                DIST. BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    M/S GUPTA TRANSPORT COMPANY (AUTHORIZED
                                TRANSPORTER) THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR OM
                                PRAKASH GUPTA NEAR OF SAVARKAR PARK, AB
                                ROAD, DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                 .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI VIVEK KHEDKAR - ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)

                                Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETU
SHASHANK
Signing time: 14-Aug-23
7:21:12 PM
                                                              2
                          following:
                                                              ORDER

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred against the order dated 14.10.2022 passed by respondent No.3 in Case No.Procurement/2018-19/4623, whereby the claim as preferred by the present petitioner, by invoking the arbitration clause in the agreement before the Arbitrator, was rejected.

At the outset, Shri Vivek Khedkar, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents submits that the petitioner is having alternate efficacious remedy available to him under the provision of Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, therefore, the present petition is misconceived and not

maintainable.

Encountered with such a situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned herein though passed by the Arbitrator by invoking arbitration clause in agreement between the parties, since it is a non speaking and unreasoned order, in the light of judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Kranti Associates Private Limited and Anr. Vs. Masood Ahmed Khan and Ors. reported in (2010) 9 SCC 496, deserves to be set aside. It was further argued that since no reasoning has been assigned by the learned Arbitrator, then the matter is required to be relegated back to the Arbitrator for deciding it afresh and in such cases when the impugned order is passed without following the principle of natural justice, the alternative remedy would not be a bar.

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, this Court is of the considered view that so far as judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Kranti Associates(Supra) is concerned, the same reiterates the legal Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 14-Aug-23 7:21:12 PM

position that in case quasi judicial authority passes an unreasoned or a non speaking order, then the said order can be set aside as reasoning is the soul of the order and in absence thereof the order cannot stand on its own legs, but the said judgment does not deal with situation where alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court keeping in agreement with the arguments advanced by the counsel for the respondents, directs the petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under the provisions of Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 14-Aug-23 7:21:12 PM