Upon parties’ consensus, the Court appointed a retired High Court judge as sole arbitrator under Section 11(6).

M/s R.R. Industries, an MSME joint venture, was awarded a GeM contract by South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL) for providing healthcare services through 13 Mobile Medical Units under SECL’s CSR initiative.

An agreement was executed on 16 August 2024, followed by Work Order No. 129 dated 3 September 2024.

The applicant alleged that the Work Order materially deviated from the GeM tender conditions, that SECL delayed issuance of the SOP and operational permissions, and that payments from November 2024 to April 2026 remained unpaid despite deployment and operation of the MMUs.

SECL subsequently issued a show-cause notice dated 10 November 2025 and cancelled the contract on 28 February 2026, forfeiting the earnest money deposit of ₹17,80,179/-.

After an earlier writ petition was disposed of with liberty to pursue appropriate legal remedies, the applicant invoked the contractual pre-arbitral mechanisms through representations and a request for constitution of a Dispute Resolution Committee. No effective action was taken by SECL.

The applicant thereafter issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, dated 1 July 2026, seeking appointment of an arbitrator. Upon SECL’s failure to appoint an arbitrator, the applicant filed the present application under Section 11(6) of the Act.

Whether the applicant was entitled to seek appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, upon SECL’s failure to act on the arbitration notice.

Whether, in view of the parties’ consensus, Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Shrivastava, a retired Judge of the High Court, should be appointed as the Sole Arbitrator.

The Court applied Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, concerning the existence of a valid arbitration agreement; Section 11(6), empowering the Court to appoint an arbitrator where a party fails to act in accordance with the agreed appointment procedure; and Section 21, governing commencement of arbitral proceedings through a notice invoking arbitration.

The Court also considered the contractual dispute-resolution mechanism under Clauses 16.1(ii) and 16.2 of the GeM General Terms and Conditions, which contemplated amicable settlement, conciliation through a Dispute Resolution Committee, and arbitration.

Where the parties agree upon a suitable arbitrator and there is no objection to the appointment, the Court may appoint that person as the Sole Arbitrator under Section 11(6).

The applicant asserted the existence of an arbitration clause in the agreement, raised subsisting contractual disputes concerning cancellation of the contract, forfeiture of the earnest money deposit, non-payment of dues, and alleged deviations from the tender conditions, and demonstrated that it had invoked the agreed pre-arbitral steps before issuing the Section 21 notice.

SECL did not contest appointment of an arbitrator and expressly stated that it had no objection to the Court appointing one.

When queried by the Court, both parties agreed that any retired Judge of the High Court could be appointed and specifically proposed Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Shrivastava.

In light of the parties’ consensus and the failure of the agreed appointment process, the Court exercised its jurisdiction under Section 11(6) and appointed the proposed retired Judge as Sole Arbitrator.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Shrivastava, a retired Judge of the High Court of Chhattisgarh, was appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

The Registry was directed to communicate the order to the Arbitrator, and the Arbitrator’s remuneration was directed to be settled by mutual consent of the parties.