Serial No.65 Reg Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) 201/2024 in[AA 23/2017] c/w CCP 15/2024 CM(M) 130/2024 J AND K ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION AGENCY … Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Z.A Shah, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A. Hanan, Advocate Vs. ER S R S MADNI (RETD. CHIEF ENGINEER) AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Tasaduq H. Khawja, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Iman Muiz, Advocate Mr.Ilayas Laway, GA with Ms.Rahila Khan, AC CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER 26.08.2025 1. In the instant Robkar framed against the contemnors herein vide order dated 02.08.2024, by this Court, it came to be provided, upon considering AA No. 23/2017 titled as “M/S M and Company Engineers and Contractors Private Limited VS Jammu & Kashmir Economic Reconstruction Agency”, that the arbitrators/contemnors herein had been directed not to proceed with the arbitration proceedings, however, despite the service of the said order upon the said arbitrators/contemnors, on 19.05.2024, the said arbitrators in the said arbitration proceedings directed the personal appearance of the Engineer Susheel Kumar on 25.05.2024, thus, observed the order of stay passed by this Court on 17.05.2024 in breach. 2. Response to the Robkar has been filed by the contemnors and at the very outset it is stated that the contemnors are law abiding citizens and hold the Hon’ble courts of law in high esteem believing firmly in the rule of law and the powers of the courts to administer justice and uphold the rule of law and that the orders of the courts are to be complied without any dimmer and that the answering respondents/contemnors herein have always complied with the directions and orders of the courts of law in letter and spirit and never ventured even in their imagination to commit any willful disobedience of the orders passed by the courts. It is also being stated that the order dated 17.05.2024, passed by the Court violation of which order was complained of in the contempt petition filed and consequently Robkar framed thereof, the very facts on the basis of which the Robkar came to be framed in fact did not exist and that no violation or defiance muchless willful defiance of the said court order has been either shown or committed by the official respondents. 3. Following facts are being stated in the aforesaid response which being relevant and germane herein are extracted in extenso and reproduced hereunder:- 1. That court has been pleased to constitute arbitral Tribunal and appoint answering respondents as Arbitrators to adjudicate upon dispute existing between M/S M And Company and Company and J&K Economic And Reconstruction Agency. The answering respondents have conducted proceedings in the matter for some time and the case was posted for further proceedings on 12.05.2024, on which date respondent, i.e J&K ERA, was supposed to produce witnesses for cross examination. 2. That on 12.05.2024, the respondent had failed to produce any witness. A detailed order was passed, and matter was again posted for 19.05.2024. The order dated 12.05.2024 consisted of 5 paragraphs. While as the first 4 paragraphs related to arbitral proceedings, the last 2 paragraphs related to payment of fee that is due to arbitral tribunal on account of proceedings conducted. It was provided in last 2 paragraphs that parties shall deposit arbitrators fee by or before next date of hearing and that both parties shall deposit Rs. 50,000/- each towards administrative expenses. 3. That the arbitral tribunal again convened on 19.05.2024, as already scheduled. On said date, the counsel for the respondents appeared and produced copy of order dated 17.05.2024, passed by High Court wherein it was directed that Arbitrators shall not proceed with the arbitration proceedings. 4. That in deference to order passed by the Court, the answering respondents deferred the arbitral proceedings, as directed by the Court and did not take any step in arbitral proceedings. 5. The answering respondents bona-fidely believed that even through arbitrators had been directed not to proceed with arbitral proceedings, the answering respondents could still insist upon payment of arbitration fee that was already due to them. Suffice to say that on previous date, the representative of J&K ERA had reported that matter regarding payment of fee was pending with the higher authorities. The directions contained in last two paragraphs of the order dated 12.05.2024 were with regard to payment of fee due to the arbitrators, as is clear from reading of order dated 12.05.2024 itself. It was in this background that on 19.05.2024, the arbitral tribunal directed presence of Er. Susheel Kumar, Project Manager so that issue regarding payment of fee that was due to arbitrators on account of proceedings already conducted could be resolved. 6. The answering respondents in good faith and honestly believed, and continue to believe, that order of the Court did not prevent the arbitrators from demanding or receiving fee that was already due to them on account of proceedings already conducted. The answering respondent had no intention to violate not could violate order of the Court. The answering respondents were conscious of the fact that answering respondents derived their mandate pursuant to orders of the Court only. Therefore, there was reason for the answering respondents to defy orders of the Court. The allegation of willful defiance of the order of the Court is, therefore, specifically clarified in the subsequent order passed by the arbitral tribunal. 7. The answering respondents week to deny all such averments made in the competent petition that are inconsistent with the submissions made hereinabove or which have not been specifically admitted. 4. Having regard to the record available on the file, inasmuch as the aforesaid response filed by the contemnors herein, this Court is of the considered opinion that there has been no disobedience muchless willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court on 17.05.2024, in that, the aforesaid explanation/response, offered and filed by the contemnors herein manifestly tends to show that the contemnors have acted bona fidely without observing the order dated 17.05.2024 in breach. 5. Under these circumstances, Robkar framed against the contemnors herein is recalled and proceedings accordingly are closed, and the proceedings qua the contempt petition bearing CCP(S) No. 201/2024 shall accordingly stand closed as well. 6. Disposed of. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 26.08.2025 “S.Nuzhat”