- (1.) The present arbitration application has been filed by the applicant under Sections 14 & 15 read with Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act").
(2.) The applicant is Govt. of India Undertaking incorporated in 1978 under the Administrative Control of Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, Govt. of India. In the instant case, the applicant has alleged interalia that an agreement was entered into between the applicant and the non-applicant on 06.10.2000, for the supply, installation, testing and commissioning of Hotline network to provide voice, data, Fax and internet connectivity for the 32 Districts and Rajasthan House, Bikaner House and Jodhpur House in Delhi to the Secretariat at Jaipur and Operation and maintenance of the Complete Network under 2 years comprehensive on site warranty. Clause 18 of the said agreement contained arbitration clause which is reproduced as under:- "18. Arbitration & Jurisdiction 18.1. All disputes arising out of this agreement and all questions relating to the interpretation of this agreement shall be decided by the Secretary, DOP, Government of Rajasthan and the decision of the Government of Rajasthan shall be final."
(3.) It appears that since the dispute had arisen between the parties, the applicant had invoked the said arbitration clause vide the letter dated 22.06.2009 and filed its claim petition before the Secretary, Department of Personnel, Govt. of Rajasthan (Annexure-3). According to the applicant, after filing of the claim petition, some settlement talks were going on between the parties, however no substantial progress having been made in the settlement, the Arbitrator vide the letter dated 04.04.2011 had convened a meeting of representatives of the parties on 06.04.2011 (Annexure-5). It is further alleged that thereafter the said Secretary, Department of Personnel did not hold any proceedings, and therefore the applicant vide the application dated 29.01.2015 (Annexure-14), had requested him to expedite the proceedings, however he had not fixed any date of hearing, till the filing of the application. Hence, the present application has been filed seeking termination of the appointment of the named Arbitrator and seeking appointment of independent Arbitrator in place of the named Arbitrator. The respondents have filed the reply, denying the allegations made in the application and further contending interalia that the arbitrator did not proceed further with the proceedings as the negotiations for settlement were going on.;