JUDGMENT

Ganguly, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The question which falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the provision of Madhya Pradesh Madhyasthan Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (hereinafter, ‘M.P. Act’) which statutorily provides for the parties to the Works Contract to refer all disputes to the Arbitration Tribunal constituted under Section 7 of the Act will continue to operate in view of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘A.C. Act 1996’) which is a Central Act, subsequently enacted.

3. The facts leading to the aforesaid controversy be noted first.

4. The appellant-Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority and Anr., impugning the judgment of the High Court dated 8.9.2010 in this appeal, entered into a ‘Works Contract’ with the respondent for construction and maintenance of Rural Road Package No.1958, District Jhabua.

5. Clause 24 of the Contract contains the ‘Dispute Redress Mechanism’ and Clause 24.1 of the same provides as under:

“24.1 If any dispute or difference of any kind what-so-ever shall arise in connection with or arising out of this Contract or the execution of work of maintenance of the Works thereunder, whether before its