M/S MASTER TOURS AND TRAVELS Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, SHRI AMARNATH JI SHRINE BOARD AND ORS , RESPONDENT NO.2 & 3

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 14620 of 2014, Judgment Date: Dec 15, 2015

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                        CIVIL APPEAL NO.14620 OF 2015
                 (Arising out of SLP ( C) NO. 28720 of 2014)


      M/S MASTER TOURS AND TRAVELS                             APPELLANT

                                VERSUS

      THE CHAIRMAN, SHRI AMARNATH JI
      SHRINE BOARD AND ORS.                                  RESPONDENTS


                            J U D G M E N T

      KURIAN, J.

            Leave granted.
            The short question is whether in terms of Clause 13 of the  Work
Order, the dispute raised  by  the  appellant  should  be  referred  to  the
Arbitration.  The Clause 13 of the Work Order reads as follows:
“In case of any dispute the matter shall be referred to the Chief  Executive
Officer – Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board, whose decision in the  matter  shall
be final.”


      Though learned Counsel for the appellant tried to  convince  that  the
aforesaid Clause has to be read as an Arbitration Clause  for  settling  the
disputes between the parties, placing  reliance  on  the  decision  of  this
Court in State of Punjab and Others Vs. Dina Nath, (2007) 5 SCC 28,  we  are
unable to appreciate the contention in view of the subsequent decision of  a
three Judge Bench of this  Court  in  P.  Dasaratharama  Reddy  Complex  Vs.
Government of Karnataka and Another, (2014) 2 SCC 201.
                                    - 2 -

      Be that as it may, in view of the long pendency of  the  dispute,  the
learned Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant  may  be  permitted
to invoke the provision for adjudication before the Chief Executive  Officer
with the appellant's participation and the same may  be  disposed  of  in  a
time bound manner.
       Having  heard  the  learned  Senior   Counsel   appearing   for   the
respondents, we see no reason to deny the request, accordingly,  the  appeal
is disposed of as follows.
      The appellant  is free to make a comprehensive representation  raising
all the disputes before the Chief  Executive  Officer  of  Respondent  No.1,
within a period of four weeks  from  today.   The  Chief  Executive  Officer
shall look into the same and  after  hearing  the  appellant  take  a  final
decision in the matter within another six weeks.
      No costs.
                                                       ...................J.
                                   [KURIAN JOSEPH]



                                                       ....................J
               [ARUN MISHRA]


      NEW DELHI;
      DECEMBER 15, 2015