Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sewa ... vs Madhya Pradesh Rajya Shahkari ... on 18 August, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 18 th OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 9970 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
PRATHMIK KRISHI SAKH SEWA SHAHKARI SAMITI
MARYADIT PARASWARA THR. BRANCH MNAGER C.P.
PATLE TEH. PARASWARA DISTT. BALAGHAT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAKESH PANDEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA SHAHKARI VIPRAN
SANGH ADHIKARI MARKFED THR. OFFICE
HANUMAN CHOWK BALAGHAT TEHSIL AND
DISTT. BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DISTIRCT SUPPLY OFFICER BALAGHAT
COLLECTOR PARISAR CIVIL LINES BALAGHAT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE COLLECTOR BALAGHAT OFFICE OF
COLLECTOR BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. UPPER COLLECTOR BALAGHAT
DISTT.BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI VIJAYENDRA SINGH CHOUDHARY - ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1)
(BY SHRI SUBODH KATHAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT/STATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 7868 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
SEWA SHAHKARI SAMITI MARYADIT TEKADI NANORA
NOT MENTION NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KRISHNA SINGH
Signing time: 22-08-2023
18:24:13
2
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAKESH PANDEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA JILA VIPNAN SANGH
NOT MENTION NOT MENTION (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER COLLECTOR
PARISAR CIVIL LINE DISTT. BALAGHAT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. COLLECTOR OFFICE OF COLLECTOR DISTT.
BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPANJALI KUMAR MISHRA - ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1)
(BY SHRI SUBODH KATHAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT/STATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 7869 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
AADIM JATI SEWA SHAHKARI SAMITI NOT MENTION
NOT MENTION (OTHER)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAKESH PANDEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA SHAHKARI VIPRAN
SANGH NOT MENSTION NOT MENTION (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER OFFICE OF
COLLECTOR TEHSIL AND DISTRICT BALAGHAT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE COLLECTOR THE STATE OF MADHYA
PR AD ES H TEHSIL AND DISTRICT BALAGHAT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. UPPER COLLECTOR THE STATE OF MADHYA
PRADESH BALABHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KRISHNA SINGH
Signing time: 22-08-2023
18:24:13
3
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPANJALI KUMAR MISHRA - ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1)
(BY SHRI SUBODH KATHAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT/STATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 9919 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
PRATHMIK KRISHI SAKH SEWA SHAHKARI SAMITI
MARYADIT BODA THR. BRANCH MANAGER R.S.
DHURVE TEH. PARASWARA DIST. BALAGHAT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAKESH PANDEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. M.P. RAJYA SHAHKARI VIPRAN SANGH
ADHIKARI THR. OFFICE HANUMAN CHOWK
BALAGHAT TEH. AND DIST. BALAGHAT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER COLLECTOR
PARISAR CIVIL LINE DISTT. BALAGHAT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. COLLECTOR OFFICE OF COLLECTOR DISTT.
BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. UPPER COLLECTOR BALAGHAT DISTT.
BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPANJALI KUMAR MISHRA - ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1)
(BY SHRI SUBODH KATHAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT/STATE)
This petition coming on for admission, this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
These petitions originate out of various orders passed by Additional
Collector, Balaghat dated 23.01.2020 in different cases.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KRISHNA SINGH
Signing time: 22-08-2023
18:24:13
Brief facts leading to the present petitions are that petitioners are a
registered co-operative society. They had entered into an agreement with the
Madhya Pradesh State Cooperative Marketing Federation, Balaghat. This
agreement as contained in Annexure P-2, contains an arbitration clause which
provides that if there arises any dispute in regard to interpretation or
implementation of any of the clauses of the agreement then, the matter shall be
referred to the District Collector within whose territorial jurisdiction, agreement
has been executed and that Collector shall be competent to discharge the
function of Arbitrator.
It is submitted that a dispute was submitted to the Collector, Balaghat.
When Collector, Balaghat failed to decide the dispute, petitioner had filed Writ
Petition No.18702/2019. This Writ Petition was decided vide order dated
18.12.2019 directing the respondent No.3 i.e, the Collector, Balaghat to
expedite the hearing of the arbitration matter and decide it expeditiously,
preferably within 45 days from the date of production of certified copy of this
order. It is submitted that Collector who is a named arbitrator in the agreement,
instead of deciding the dispute, delegated the authority in favour of the
Additional Collector, Balaghat who passed impugned award dated 23.01.2020.
T h e bone of contention is that whether Collector who is a named
arbitraror in the agreement can sub delegate his authority in favour of the
Additional Collector or not ?
Shri Vijayendra Singh Choudhary, learned counsel for the respondent
submits that in view of the law laid down by Supreme Court in Bhaven
Construction through authorized signatory Premjibhai K Shah Vs. Executive
Engineer, Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited and Another reported in
Signature Not Verified
2022 (1) SCC 75, it is held that discretion under Article 226/227 of the
Signed by: KRISHNA SINGH
Signing time: 22-08-2023
18:24:13
Constitution cannot be exercised to allow judicial interference beyond
procedure established under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This
power needs to be exercised in exceptional rarity, wherein one party is left
remediless under the statute or a clear "bad faith" shown by one of the parties.
Placing reliance on the said judgment, it is submitted that petitioner has a
remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as
amended from time to time.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record, here the ratio of the judgment in Premjibhai K Shah (supra) issue is not
applicable to the present case because here issue is not about the correctness of
the award but the authority passing the award. Issue is of the larger public
interest as to whether a named arbitrator can delegate his authority in favour of
Additional Collector or not. Law in this regard is crystal clear.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Marathwada University Vs. Seshrao Balwant
Rao Chavan reported in 1989 (3) SCC 132 in para 20 has held that - Sub-
delegation of powers - In accordance with the maxim delegatus non potest
delegare, means that a statutory power must be exercised only by the body or
officer in whom it has been confided, unless sub-delegation of the power is
authorised by express words or necessary implication. There is a strong
presumption against construing a grant of legislative, judicial or disciplinary
power as impliedly authorising sub-delegation; and the same may be said of any
power to the exercise of which the designated body should address its own
mind.
In view of the said provision which provides that a delegatus non potest
delegare i.e, a delagate cannot subdelegate unless that power is expressly
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KRISHNA SINGH
Signing time: 22-08-2023
18:24:13
provided in the statute. Same is the ratio of law as laid down in case of Director
General, ESI and Another Vs. T. Abdul Razak reported in (1996) 4 SCC 708,
wherein in para 18, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in accordance with the
maxim delegatus non potest delegare, a statutory power must be exercised
only by the body or officer in whom it has been confided unless sub delegation
of power is authorized by express words or necessary implication and this
aspect is taken into consideration.
I have no hesitation that the Collector, who is a named arbitrator in the
agreement, in absence of any express power to delegate could not have
delegated his authority in favour of the Additional Collector to act as an
Arbitrator. Therefore, award passed by the Additional Collector deserves to be
set aside and is set aside. The matter is relegated back to the Collector, Balaghat
to act as an Arbitrator and proceed from the stage where he had delegated
power in favour of the Additional Collector and complete arbitration
proceedings within 90 days of receipt of certified copy of the order.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
veni
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KRISHNA SINGH
Signing time: 22-08-2023
18:24:13
