JUDGMENT :

Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 14.01.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (C) No.4235 of 2021, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant was dismissed.

2. The appellant, which is a Company registered and incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, is engaged in the field of construction of large infrastructure development projects. It had entered into an agreement on 23.05.2012 along with its other Consortium Members with National Mineral Development Corporation Limited (NMDC) in respect of the works pertaining to Civil, Supply of Fabricated Building Steel Structures including Sheeting & Glazing and Receipt, Unloading, Storage and Transportation from Stores to Erection Site, Erection including Supervision, etc. relating to Steel Melting Shop (Package No.6) for 3.0 MTPA NMDC integrated Steel Plant at Nagarnar, Chhattisgarh, valued at Rs.643.77 Crores, approximately. The appellant had placed a letter of award of contract (LAC) to respondent No.2 on 29.12.2012, which was followed by a contract agreement dated 06.06.2013, for supply of Fabrication and Transportation to site, building steel structures for Steel Melting Shop (Package No.06), at a total price of Rs.17,78,52,500/- of approximately 2,500 MT. The time for completion of the above works was 15 months from the effective date of contract, which is 06.05.2013.

3. It is not necessary to dilate on all the details for the purpose of disposal of this appeal. Suffice it to say that three amendments, being (i) amendment dated 10.07.2013, (ii) amendment dated 06.06.2013, and (iii) amendment dated 05.05.2014, were signed with regard to price and supply. It is alleged by the appellant that there was failure on the part of respondent No. 2 in adhering to the terms of the agreement, but it raised bill for Rs.46,27,70,759/-, which was disputed by the appellant and it is stated that the balance amount payable by the appellant to the respondent No. 2 is only Rs. 25,00,000/-.

4. The respondent No. 2 subsequently filed a claim petition before respondent No. 1, i.e., Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, for short, Facilitation Council, by invoking Section 20 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short, the Act of 2006) in the month of August, 2018 claiming Rs.7,89,33,137/-, which included the outstanding amount of Rs.43,60,936/-, claim towards the price escalation of Rs.3,53,99,216/- and interest from 13.12.2016 to 18.06.2018 amounting to Rs.3,91,72,985/-.

5. As stated in the writ petition, after receiving the notice, the appellant filed reply to the claim petition by disputing the claims lodged and praying for dismissal of the application. A rejoinder was filed by the respondent No. 2 on 23.11.2020.

6. Though, not stated in the writ petition as was originally filed, subsequently, on 22.10.2021, the appellant filed an application for taking documents on record in which an order dated 12.04.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(227) No. 22/2021, a copy of the letter dated 18.08.2021 issued by the Deputy Director, Facilitation Council and copy of the general conditions of contract were annexed. Perusal of the order dated 12.04.2021 would go to show that grievance was expressed by the appellant to the effect that without resorting to conciliation proceedings under Section 18(2) of the Act of 2006, an arbitration proceeding under Section 18(3) of the Act of 2006, was initiated. Noticing that the Facilitation Council had given only an opportunity to the parties to “compromise the matter” and there being no indication in the proceedings of the Facilitation Council that any conciliation proceeding had been taken up as required under Section 18(2) of the Act of 2006, the writ petition was disposed of holding that initial proceeding under Section 18(3) was erroneous and accordingly, directed the Facilitation Council to take u