C. P. Sen, J. - This is a petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution for striking down of M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983, and for quashing the order dated 16-8-1985 of the Chief Engineer cancelling the appointment of arbitrator dated 14-3-1985 for deciding the dispute raised by the petitioner-contractor. This order will also govern the disposal of M.P. No. 1922/1985 between the same parties wherein the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22-6-1985 of the State Government cancelling the appointment of the sole arbitrator to settle the dispute between the parties.

2. The petitioner is a contractor having its registered office at Bhopal. The petitioner's tender for construction of Dejla Dawada left Earth Dam in the district of West Nimar, M.P., was accepted by the State Government and agreement No. 12DL/1983-84 was entered into and the petitioner commenced its work. Clause G.C. 52 of the Agreement provided for settlement of disputes by recourse to arbitration. As per this clause all the disputes and differences in respect of which the decision has not become final and conclusive shall be referred for arbitration. The Chief Engineer, Narmada, Tapti Basin shall send to the contractor a list of three officers of the rank of Superintending Engineer or higher who have not been connected with the work under the agreement to act as arbitrators. The contractor was then required within 15 days of the receipt of the letter to select and communicate as to who out of the three should be the sole arbitrator. Thereafter the dispute has to be referred to the arbitrator so named. On the failure of the Chief Engineer to submit the names of the arbitrators within 30 days, it would be open to the contractor to send a list of three officers who may be appointed as arbitrators and the Chief Engineer may then select any one of the officers so named within 15 days and on his failure to do so it would be open to the contractor to name the sole arbitrator amongst the three names submitted. The arbitration has to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940, or any statutory modification thereof. Performance under the agreement shall continue during arbitration proceedings and payments due to the contractor shall not be with held. All awards shall be in writing and in case of awards amounting to rupees one lack and above, such awards shall state the reasons for the amount awarded. In the meanwhile, M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was enacted and it came into force from 1-3-1985. Under Section 7 of the Act, either party to a works contract shall irrespective of the fact whether the agreement contains an arbitration clause or not, refer in writing the dispute to the Tribunal constituted under the Act. Under Section 2(i) 'works contract' means an agreement for the execution of any work relating to construction, repairs or maintenance of any building or superstructure, dam, weir canal, reservoir, tank, lake, road, well, bridge, culvert, factory, workshop or such other works as may be specified by the notification, entered into by the State Government or by any of its public undertakings. Under Section 19, the High Court has been given power of revision against any award. Under Section 20(1) notwithstanding anything contained in the Arbitration Act or in any agreement or usage to the contrary, no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or decide any dispute of which cognizance can be taken by the Tribunal under this Act. Under Sub-section (2) nothing contained in Sub-section (1) shall apply to any arbitration proceeding either pending before any arbitrator or umpire or before any court or authority under the provisions of Arbitration Act. In exercise of the power conferred by Section 29 of the Act, the State Government framed M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Niyam, 1984, fixing salary and other emoluments of the Chairman and members and the m