ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. C.P. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Lal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M.Z. Ahmed, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A.M. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4. Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1.

2. The petitioners herein have prayed for appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1996 Act’) keeping in view the amended Section 12 of the 1996 Act, as has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. Vs. HSCC (India) Ltd. (2020) 20 SCC 760, i.e., an independent and disinterested Arbitrator would have to be appointed by the Court and not in terms of the procedure provided in the arbitration clause, wherein the Arbitrator is an interested person.

3. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 submits that the appointment of an Arbitrator would have to be done under Section 11 of the 1996 Act in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Parmar Constructio