ORDER :

U. Durga Prasad Rao, J.

The genesis of all the above matters owes to order dated 21.12.2021 in W.P.No.13192/2021 passed by learned single Judge.

2. The brief factual matrix of the case is thus :

(a) The petitioners in W.P.No.13192/2021 are claiming to be the President, Vice-President and Treasurer of NRI Academy of Sciences (for short ‘NRIAS’) registered under the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001. The petitioners prayed for writ of mandamus declaring the action of the District Registrar, Vijayawada/2nd respondent in approving the amendment of the list of office bearers of NRIAS society vide proceedings dated 26.06.2021 submitted by unofficial respondents 4 to 10 and at the same time not considering the amendment petition filed by the petitioners on 24.06.2021 and rejecting the same as illegal and beyond his jurisdiction as per the provisions of A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001. Obviously there were rival claims among the petitioners and unofficial respondents to have control over the management of NRIAS which runs 1000 bedded hospital and medical and nursing colleges. Respondents opposed the writ petition. Learned single Judge held that the 2nd respondent/District Registrar erred in giving endorsement accepting the document filed by the unofficial respondents and rejecting the document filed by the petitioners since both actions are wrong. Ultimately, learned Judge partly allowed the writ petition and set aside the endorsement given by the Registrar. Learned Judge left the parties to choose their own options and to pursue their legal remedies before a competent Court or arbitrator as the case may be with an observation that the list filed by the both parties shall be kept in the record of the 2nd respondent and they shall be subject to the final decision of a competent Court or arbitrator as the case may be.

(b) Aggrieved by the above judgment, unofficial respondents 4 and 7 filed writ appeal Nos.204/2022 and 234/2022 respectively. The State also filed writ appeal No.253/2022. One Dr. Savitri Devi Bikkina also filed writ appeal No.149/2022 whereas the 1st petitioner filed writ appeal No.142/2022. All the aforesaid appeals were disposed of by a common judgment dated 22.02.2022 by the division bench of this court as follows:

“7. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, Sri Justice Devinder Gupta (Retired Chief Justice) is appointed as sole Arbitrator to decide all existing disputes between the parties referable to Section 23 of the Act, 2001. It will remain open for both the parties to agitate all legal and factual aspects of the disputes before the Arbitrator. Learned Senior Counsel would agree that all pending litigations in relation to the subject dispute before any other legal forums/courts shall be withdrawn by the respective parties. Needless to say, depending upon the need and urgency, both parties would be at liberty to approach the Arbitrator for any interim order. We make it clear that the question of law pertaining to interpretation of Section 9 of the Act, 2001 is left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings.

8. In view of appointment of Arbitrator with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we set-aside the order passed by the learned single Judge and dispose of all the writ appeals as well as the writ petition in the above stated terms.”

(c) Thus the arbitral tribunal was constituted with learned sole arbitrator. The arbitrator sent notices to the concerned parties and scheduled the sitting of arbitral tribunal on 01.04.2022 at Neethi Bagh Club, New Delhi. Learned arbitrator fixed the date 08.04.2022 for filing the claim statement; the date 29.04.2022 for filing defence and counter claim and the date 30.05.2022 for further proceedings. While so, the claimants therein filed application under Section 17 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim relief. The order passed by the learned arbitrator is the cause for filing the present matters under consideration now.

(d) It a