Jurisdictional and procedural issues in arbitration must be addressed at the outset.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the defendant No.1 in A.R.C.No.260 of 2022 filed before the 4^th respondent Arbitrator. According to the petitioner, the arbitration case is not maintainable for want of jurisdiction. The petitioner contends that the issue raised in Ext.P1 is purely service related and has to be adjudicated before the Arbitration Court constituted under Section 70A of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short 'the Act'). It is further contended that the claim is barred by limitation. The petitioner has, accordingly, filed Ext.P4 petition before the 4^th respondent to consider the maintainability of the ARC as preliminary issue.

2. Sri.K.R.Sunil, the learned Senior Government Pleader submits that Ext.P4 petition is belated as it was filed after the hearing was conducted and the matter was taken up for orders.

3. A preliminary issue, as the term itself suggests, has to be raised at the initial stage of the proceedings. It is trite that when the question of maintainability is raised, the said issue has to be considered before sallying forth into a discussion and decision on merits. Once such a preliminary issue is raised, the Arbitrator has to consider the same at the preliminary stage itself before prosecuting further with the case. The ARC is of the year 2022 and Ext.P4 application is dated 04.04.2025. It is not disputed by the petitioner that the hearing of the matter has been concluded. In the said circumstances, I do not find any reason to direct the 4^th respondent to consider Ext.P4 petition at this stage.

The writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner.