SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 678

N.S.HEGDE, B.P.SINGH
State Of Orissa – Appellant
Versus
Gokulananda Jena – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Santosh Hegde, J.-Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. State of Orissa in this appeal has challenged the order of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack dated 8.4.2002 made in O.J.C.No. 1483 of 2002. In the said writ petition, the State of Orissa had challenged the validity of an order made by the Judge designated by the Chief Justice of the said court for appointing an Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act ).

3. The High Court after referring to a judgment of this Court delivered by a Constitution Bench in the case of M/s. Konkan Railways Corporation Ltd. & Anr. vs. M/s. Rani Construction Pvt. Ltd. [(2002) 2 SCC 388] came to the conclusion that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the correctness of an order made by the Designated Judge under Section 11(6) of the Act is not maintainable because the said order is an administrative order and this Court in the case of M/s. Konkan Railway (supra) has held that such an order cannot be challenged before this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Drawing an analogy from the said judgment, the High Court came to



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top