AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pankaj Purohit, J
By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the indulgence of this Court for a direction to the learned District Magistrate/Arbitrator, District Haridwar for expediting the arbitration application pending before it.
Since it was not clear from the record as to whether such an application is registered with the Arbitrator or not, the State Counsel was directed to seek instructions from the concerned authorities vide order dated 21.09.2024. Thereafter, on 25.09.2024, on instructions, it was contended by learned State Counsel that the application for arbitration has already been withdrawn by the petitioners, but, the said fact was vehemently disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners. At this, this Court vide its order dated 25.09.2024, directed respondent no.1 to produce the original record of the case before this Court within ten days.
Today, learned State Counsel produced the record of the arbitration before this Court.
From perusal of the endorsement made on the application, it is clear that an endorsement has been made on the application by the Advocate of the petitioner Mr. Asharfi Lal on 07.09.2022 stating therein that there was some clerical mistake in the application and he did not want to press the said application. But, from the record, it is not clear as to whether any further order was passed by respondent no.1/District Magistrate/ Arbitrator, Haridwar for dismissing the said application as not pressed.
In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of finally. Respondent no.1 is directed to pass appropriate order on the said application within a period of one week from today, keeping in view the endorsement made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.