1 2026:CGHC:25823 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3060 of 2026 • Sandeep Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Milapdas Sahu Aged About 32 Years At Present Incharge/ Manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Dhadhutola Paddy Procurement Center Dhadhutola R.N. No. 04, Add- Village Aamgaon Post Aamgaon, Tehsil Churiya, Dist. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) --- Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Oprative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex Cbd Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur, (C.G.). 4. The Collector Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). 5. The District Marketing Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). 6. The Chief Executive Officer Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). 8. The District Food Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagadh Chowki (C.G.) --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3097 of 2026 • Tularam Nishad S/o Shri Vikram Singh Nishad Aged About 57 Years At Present Incharge/ Manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Bharoitola Paddy Procurement Center Bharitola R.N. No. 08, DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 Address Village Foolkodo Post Bharitola, Tehsil Manpur, Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chowki Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4. The Collector Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 5. The District Marketing Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 6. The Chief Executive Officer Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 8. The District Food Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagadh Chowki Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3091 of 2026 • Yogesh Kumar Tripure S/o- Shri Namdev Tripure Aged About 37 Years At Present Incharge/manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Chilhati Paddy Procurement Center Chilhati R.N. No.03, Add- Village Chilhati Post Chilhati Tehsil Ambagarh Chowki, Distric-Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.). 3 4. The Collector Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarhchowki (C.G.). 5. The District Marketing Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarhchowki (C.G.). 6. The Chief Executive Officer, Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society District- Mohla, Manpur- Ambagarhchowki (C.G.). 8. The District Food Officer District- Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3089 of 2026 • Shekh Rahamatulla Qureshi S/o Shri Shekh Rustam Qureshi, Aged About 43 Years At Present Incharge Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Rengakathera Paddy Procurement Center Rengakathera R. N. No. 11, Add. Village Rengakathera Post Rengakathera, Tehsil Mohala, Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Oprative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur, C.G. 492002. 4. The Collector Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambachowki (C.G.). 5. The Distirct Marketing Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambachowki (C.G.). 6. The Chief Executive Officer, Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambachowki (C.G.). 8. The District Food Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagadh Chowki (C.G.). --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3078 of 2026 • Girish Kumar Patar S/o Shri Jagdev Ram Aged About 41 Years At Present Incharge/ Manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Mateva Paddy Procurement Center Gotatola R.N. No. 1100, Address Village 4 Gidaki Post Gotatola, Tehsil Mohala, Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagardh Chowki Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. The Manager Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4. The Collector Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 5. The District Marketing Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 6. The Chief Executive Officer Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Mohla- Manpur-Ambagadh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 8. The District Food Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagadh Chowki Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3074 of 2026 • Satish Kumar S/o Shri Vishram Singh Kore Aged About 34 Years At Present Incharge/ Manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Mohala Paddy Procurement Center Mohala R.N. No. 13, Address Village Herkutumb Post Mohala, Tehsil Mohala, Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chowki Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4. The Collector Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 5. The District Marketing Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 6. The Chief Executive Officer Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Distt. Mohla Manpur Amba Chowki Chhattisgarh. 8. The District Food Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagadh Chowki Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3067 of 2026 • Keman Lal Sahu S/o Shri Lt. Dhansai Sahu Aged About 42 Years At Present Incharge/manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Antargaon Paddy Procurement Center Antargaon R.N. No. 02, Add- Village Gopalinchuwa, Post Gopalinchuwa, Tehsil Mohala, Distt. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex Cbd Sector 21 Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. The Collector District Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 5. The District Marketing Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 6. The Chief Executive Officer Co-Operative Central Bank Maryadit Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society, Distt. Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. 6 8. The District Food Officer Distt. Mohla Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3065 of 2026 • Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Dhaniram Aged About 35 Years At Present Incharge/manager Of Samiti Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Vicharpur Paddy Procurement Center Vicharpur R.N. No. 1086, Add. - Village Otobandha Post Korchatola, Tehsil Ambagarh, Chowki, Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Oprative, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Secretary Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower-C Commercial Complex C B D Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur, (C.G.). 4. The Collector Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambachowki (C.G.). 5. The District Marketing Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambachowki (C.G.). 6. The Chief Executive Officer Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Rajnandgaon Chowki District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 7. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambachowki (C.G.). 8. The District Food Officer Dist. Mohla, Manpur, Ambagadh Chowki (C.G.) --- Respondents AND WPC No. 3066 of 2026 • Bhedprakash Sahu S/o Shri Dharamdas Sahu, Aged About 38 Years At Present Samiti Manager Prathmik Krishi Shakh Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Chivari R.N. No.1058, Add Village Sakri Post Sakri, Tehsil Kurud Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.) --- Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Co -Operative Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya , Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur (C.G.). 7 2. The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Suppliers Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya , Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited Office At 6th Floor Tower -C Commercial Complex Cbd Sector 21 Atal Nagar District Raipur, C.G.492002. 4. The District Marketing Officer Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.). 5. The Chief Executive Officer, Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit Dhamtari Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.). 6. The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.). 7. The District Food Officer Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.). --- Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner in all the petitions : Mr. Nitesh Sahu, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Deputy G.A. For Respondent No.3 in WPC No.3078/2026 & 3067/2026 : Ms. Astha Shukla, Advocate. For Respondents No.3 & 4 in WPC Nos.3060/2026, 3065/2026, 3074/2026, 3089/2026, 3091/2026 & 3097/2026 : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate. For Respondent Nos.3 & 4 in WPC No.3066/2026 : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent No.6 in WPC No.3060/2026, 3065/2026, 3067/2026, 3074/2026, 3078/2026, 3089/2026, 3091/2026 & 3097/2026 : Ms. Khyati Adil, counsel appears on behalf of Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 24/06/2026 1. Heard. 2. All these captioned writ petitions share a common background and involve the same issues, therefore, they were clubbed, heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 8 3. For the sake of convenience, Writ Petition (C) No. 3030 of 2026 is treated as the lead case for the purpose of disposing all the writ petitions. The petitioner in the said writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs :- “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records pertaining to impugned action of the respondents for the kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to give also the protection of shortage due to dryness as earlier provided as well as saMe to be protection granted to the millars as in the order dated 15.05.2024 (Annexure-P/5) 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be plesed to direct the respondent No.3 to provide excess amount which has been invest to protect the paddy after 31st March to till date and zero shortage incentive (Protsahan) amount. 10.4 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to 7 to stop harass the petitioner by making pressure through police to fill zero shortage from own cost. 10.5 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to 7 to make an enquiry and about the shortage is due to dry and find the liable person for punishment. 10.6 Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit, in the interest of justice.” 4. Succinctly stated, the facts of the case, as canvassed by the petitioner, are that the petitioner is the Manager/In-charge of the respective Paddy Procurement Center(s) of the Cooperative Societies and works under the direct supervision, observation and instructions of Respondent No.7. The State Government issues a Paddy Procurement Policy at the beginning of every Financial/Purchasing year. For the current purchasing year i. e. Session 2025-2026, Respondent No.2 has issued the relevant Policy. The petitioner purchased 85018 quintal paddy from Dhadhutola Centre and shortage occurred due to dryness of about 1368 quintal. The petitioner also intimated the same to the respondent authorities but the same went in vain, 9 despite that the respondent authorities issued a direction ordering to make up for any procurement shortages at their own cost. From the initial stage of the procurement process, the petitioner regularly informed the respondents through written communications that the transportation/lifting of paddy had not commenced in accordance with the guidelines, which would severely impact and disrupt the procurement process. Though several oral and written requests were made by the petitioner urging the authorities to lift the paddy within the timelines prescribed under the State Policy, no action was taken by the concerned authorities and the respondents have shown no interest in complying with the guidelines/Policy of the State. The Collector, Mohla directed the recovery of the alleged paddy shortage from the petitioner to achieve a “Zero Shortage” status. Further, directions have been issued to register an FIR against the petitioner and to recover the “dryness shortage” directly from the In-charge of the Paddy Procurement Center(s). The State Government extended protection to Rice Millers by permitting an allowance of 5% for “dryness shortage” (weight loss due to moisture evaporation), while completely denying any such dryness allowance to the Paddy Procurement Centers. Though the Policy provides timely lifting of paddy from the centers, but the Millers deliberately delayed lifting to gain a double advantage on weight shortages. This entire resultant shortage is then unfairly penalized and imposed upon the Centre Incharge and Cooperative Samiti. The State Government and the Marketing Federation are well aware that Millers do not lift paddy from Procurement Centers within the time frame prescribed under the Policy. In this regard, the State Government had previously granted consent to the Marketing Federation to accord a 3% dryness shortage benefit to the Cooperative Societies in the year 2022. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the arbitrary directions issued by Respondents, whereby the said authority is compelling the petitioner to fill 10 the shortage, failing which, he face a threat of an FIR and coercive financial recovery for natural dryness shortages. Hence, these Petitions. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned action of the respondent authorities, particularly respondents 4 to 7 disregards the guidelines and Policy framed by the State Government. The responsibility of the petitioner is confined to purchase and safe custody of the paddy stock, however, the alleged shortage in weight is entirely attributable to natural dryage and moisture evaporation caused by severe heat waves, which is completely beyond the control of human. He also submits that respondents 4 to 7 ignored the petitioner’s request to transport the paddy as early as possible and they deliberately did not consider this issue. The authorities in collusion with certain Rice Millers are unlawfully demanding 10% illegal demand to clear the zero shortage and transport rest of the paddy from the Center. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner pray to allow the petitions. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent-State as well as Respondent-MARKFED submit that the reliefs sought by the petitioner cannot be granted because it is against the Paddy Procurement Policy for the Session 2025-2026. Under the said Policy, there is no provision for dryage benefit. Furthermore, as far as the transportation part is concerned, the Policy itself provides for a mechanism to remove any hindrance as MARKED states that if transportation facilities cannot be provided by MARKFED, the petitioner-Society is permitted to transport the paddy from the concerned Societies to the Center, as directed by MARKFED. They submit that the expenses incurred by Society would then be adjusted by MARKFED. As such, timely transportation would be the responsibility of the Society itself. Therefore, the concerned Society cannot hold the State or MARKFED liable for any delayed transportation of paddy. They lastly submit that since no benefit in respect of dryage of paddy can be granted to the 11 Society under the Policy, the petitions as framed and filed by the petitioners are without merit and liable to be dismissed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petitions. 8. Admittedly, the reliefs sought by the petitioner stem from the natural dryage of paddy, which led to reduction in its total weight due to moisture evaporation. This shortage occurred due to non-lifting and omission to transport the paddy from the Center within the stipulated time. Though the petitioner made several efforts and repeatedly made communications with the respondents to expedite the lifting of the paddy but the concerned authorities chose not to take any steps. Under the Paddy Procurement Policy of the State Government for the Kharif Marketing Session 2025-2026, there are specific provisions i.e. clause 15.9 and clause 16.3, which address the subject issue and are reproduced below : 15.9 धान उपार्जन के न्द्रों में संग्रहित धान के लिए केई संखत मेंत्रा मेंन्य न गी!। 16.3 धान के पारि$वन  त& लिनधारि$त पारि$वनकेत द्वा$ पारि$वन न हिकेय र्जन पा$ आवश्यकेतन&सं$ स्व!के+ त पारि$वन द$ पा$ हिकेसं! भी! पारि$वनकेत सं पारि$वन के केय के$य र्ज संकेत .। मेंके फे ड द्वा$ पारि$वन न के$य र्जन के1 स्थिस्3लित में स्व!के+ त पारि$वन द$ पा$ संलिमेंलितय द्वा$ धान के पारि$वन के$य र्जव । इसं  त& संलिमेंलित उसं धान भीण्ड$ण व सं&$क्षा मेंद अ3व प्रासंलिगीके व्यय के मेंद में प्रादत्त अलिग्रमें $लि< के उपायगी पारि$वन द यके के भी&गीतन  त& के$ संके गी! त3 ऐसं व्यय के1 प्रालितपालित विवपाणन संघ द्वा$ संलिमेंलित के के1 र्जएगी!। संलिमेंलितय द्वा$ धान पारि$वन के$य र्जन पा$ संग्रण के न्द्रों में धान भीण्ड$ण के$न  त& उलि@त व्यवस्3 मेंके फे ड द्वा$ के1 र्जव । 12 9. A perusal of the aforesaid clauses would show that the State Government has framed a Policy, according to which, no dryage is generally permitted. Clause 16.3 provides that in the event MARKFED fails to transport the paddy from the concerned Societies, the Societies themselves are directed to arrange transportation at the applicable rates with the expenses incurred to be subsequently adjusted by MARKFED. Thus, the main ground raised by the petitioner regarding natural dryage caused by delayed transportation cannot be adjudicated by this Court, as doing so would ignore the terms of the subject Policy, which allows no permissible dryage . The petitioner has entered into an Agreement with the respondents, wherein clause 5.6 of the said Agreement stipulates as under : 5.6- foi.ku la?k }kjk iznk; dh xbZ jkf'k ls miktZu dsUnz ¼lfefr½ }kjk /kku foi.ku la?k dks de izkIr gksus ij 'ks"k jkf'k dh olwyh lfefr dks iznk; deh'ku ,oa vU; vuqlkafxd enksa ls jkf'k dh dVkSrh dh tkosxh A blds mijkar Hkh olwyh ;ksX; jkf'k 'ks"k jgus ij ftyk foi.ku vf/kdkjh }kjk N- x- jkT; lgdkjh lkslk;Vh vf/kfu;e 1960 ds varxZr olwyh dk;Zokgh gsrq l{ke U;k;ky; esa izdj.k ntZ fd;k tkosxk A” 10. Likewise, Clause 13 of the Agreement provides the resolution of the disputes between the parties through arbitration, which reads as under: 13- vkfCkZVªs'ku %& bl vuqca/k dh fdlh Hkh df.Mdk ls lacaf/kr fookn mRiUu gksus dh fLFkfr esa fookn ds fu.kZ; gsrq ftys es a ftyk dysDVj dk fu.kZ; vfUre gksxk tks mHk;i{kksa dks ekU; gksxk A dysDVj }kjk fn;s x;s fu.kZ; dh vihy mHk;i{kksa }kjk ftys ds laHkkxh; vk;qDr dks dh tk ldsxh A”… 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also considering the State Government’s Paddy Procurement Policy for the year 2025-2026, this 13 Court is of the view that an alternative and efficacious remedy exists by invoking arbitration Clause 13 of the Agreement. Since the Agreement itself contains a dispute resolution mechanism for resolving conflicts between the parties, the petitioners ought to have invoked arbitration clause in respect of shortage of paddy. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petitions for the reliefs sought by all the petitioners herein. 12. In view of the above, the petitioners are relegated to raise their disputes before the appropriate authority under the arbitration clause of the Agreement in accordance with law. In the event the petitioners approach the concerned authorities for arbitration concerning any dispute covered under the said clause, the concerned authorities are directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law. 13. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The concerned authorities vested with the jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute under the arbitration clause are at liberty to initiate and conduct appropriate arbitration proceedings and pass a reasoned order after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in accordance with law. 14. With these observations/directions, all the Petitions stand disposed of. 15. Interlocutory application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Deepti Jha