RANJIT MORE, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and, by consent, the petition is heard finally.

2. Heard Mr. Kane, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Oak, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 and Mr. Vanarse, learned AGP for the State.

3. By invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:

(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for records and proceedings of the impugned order dated 29th April 2015 passed by Respondent No. 1 in Petition No. 39A/2011 before Respondent No. 1 (Exhibit-E to the Petition) and after going through the legality, validity and propriety thereof, be pleased to quash and set aside the same.

(b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or a writ in the nature of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction prohibiting Respondent No. 1 from exercising any further jurisdiction over the MSME Reference and specifically prohibiting Respondent No. 1 from entering upon arbitration in the Petition No. 39A