Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 63142 (PNJ)

M/S OM METALLOGIC LIMITED v. HARYANA MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL

CWP/15207/2025 · 2025-07-17

Kuldeep Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

119 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-15207-2025 Date of Decision : 17.07.2025 M/S OM METALLOGIC LIMITED .....Petitioner VERSUS HARYANA MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl.AG, Haryana. KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) 1. Through the instant writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for issuance of a mandamus upon respondent no.1 to decide the representation dated 01.04.2025 (Annexure P-4), whereby, the petitioner has made a request to consider the report submitted by the sole Arbitrator and passed an Award accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner claims that the sole Arbitrator in Arbitration case bearing No.642/2018, has already submitted its report way back on dated 14.10.2019, and then it was referred back, to consider the same as a recommendation, however, thereafter, no such decision has been taken upon the report submitted by the Arbitrator, in which the final decision to be taken by respondent no.1. DHARAM VIR 2025.07.18 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-15207-2025 -2- 3. At this stage, notice of motion to respondent no.1 only. 4. Notice upon respondent no.2, is not required to be issued, as the only innocuous and bona fide prayer has been made to pass a direction upon respondent no.1, to decide the claim of the present petitioner most expeditiously. 5. Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl.AG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1, and submits that he has no objection in case a mandamus is passed upon respondent no.1, to decide the representation (supra), as preferred by the present petitioner, in a time bound manner. 6. In view of the above, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction upon respondent no.1, to decide the representation (supra), of the petitioner, most expeditiously, preferably within a period of 01 month, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (KULDEEP TIWARI) July 17, 2025 JUDGE dharamvir Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No DHARAM VIR 2025.07.18 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document