MP Arbitration Tribunal Taking Decade To Decide Matters? High Court Directs State To Consider Increasing Member Posts

The division bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain observed, “The State is directed to complete the proposed amendment process and notify the same within two months from today. Further, State is directed to assess within two months from today, whether more number of the members are required, if so, the process to appoint the members shall be initiated and completed within two months thereafter. The existing three vacancies as noted in paragraph above shall also be filled up, apart from any new sanctioned vacancies.”

In its order dated January 20, the Court had directed the State to speed up the process for administrative approval for appointment of members of Arbitration Tribunal and amendment of Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983.

For context, the Act provides for the establishment of a Tribunal to arbitrate in disputes to which the State government or a Public Undertaking [wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the State Government], is a party, and for matters incidental thereto or connected therewith.

On January 27, the Deputy Advocate General informed the Court about the letter issued by Additional Law Secretary of State, intimating steps in compliance. Thereafter, the Court had directed the respondents to take further steps expeditiously.

On Monday, when the Court sought for status from the State, it was informed the Court that out of 6 sanctioned posts including Chairman, there are two technical members and one judicial member vacancies. 25 applications have been received for judicial member post and two applications for technical members posts.

Counsel for the petitioner however pressed for speedy disposal of matters by the Tribunal and urged for creation of more posts. He referred to Supreme Court's order in M/s Essel Infra Projects Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh where it was held that State must monitor timeliness so that arbitration proceedings do not take unduly long time.

“My Lord, the statutory arbitration tribunal constituted by the State is taking up to 10-15 years to decide the matters. This is what I'm highlighting. Existing strength will take same period, one post will not make a difference of 15-year disposal. Supreme Court directed the government that you create additional posts otherwise stop that process of statutory arbitration...I go for arbitration…after three years only notices were issued in the arbitration case and seven years have passed till now and seven years more will take for the matter to come up for the final hearing...That is what was the concern of Supreme Court that you make additional benches. So one post which the State is highlighting is not the real issue. That will not make any difference. Difference will be when the Government creates multiple benches by adding more and more members,” Petitioner's counsel submitted.

The Court thus directed the State to assess whether more number of members are required and if so then the members shall be appointed.

“It is made clear that the whole process shall be completed within four months from today, failing which, the respondents No.1 & 2 shall personally remain present in Court and explain as to why the direction passed by this Court has not been complied with.”, the Court said.

The matter is listed for further hearing on August 28.

Case Title: Sanjay Kumar Patel versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others, W.P. No.46/2021