Disposed

M/s Kaiyumi Printing Press v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Jul 2022WPC/3090/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council failed to adhere to the statutory time limit. The court directed the Council to decide the petitioner's dispute within 90 days from the date of receiving the copy of the order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to decide the application dated 06.10.2021 within 90 days from receipt of copy of this order.

M/s Kaiyumi Printing Press Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Petition (C) No. 3090 of 2022

¶5

M/s Kaiyumi Printing Press, Through Its Proprietor Javed Hussain, Office At Sadar Bazar, Sadaani Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Commerce And Industries, Mantralaya, Sector- 19, Kotara Bhantha, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 492101

¶9

2. Micro And Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC), Chhattisgarh Through Directorate Of Industries, Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No. 1. Telibandha, Raipur (C.G.) 492001

¶10

3. Chhattisgarh SAMVAD, Sector 19 North Block, Samvad Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492002

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. Apurv Goyal, Advocate For State : Mr. P. Acharya, P.L.

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board

¶14

15.07.2022

¶15

1. The limited relief that the petitioner seeks is for an appropriate direction to the respondent no.2 to conclude the proceedings initiated at the behest of the petitioner at the earliest.

¶16

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition is that the petitioner was issued with certain work order of printing health cards for the Govt. of Chhattisgarh under Ayushman Bharat Scheme. The petitioner had completed the work assigned within time and delivered the required number of cards ordered to be published by the

¶17

¶18

petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner has been approaching the respondents for clearing the bills which the petitioner had raised but till date the same has not been processed. The petitioner thereafter moved an application before the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council on 06.10.2021 which has been registered as Application No.CG14B0001122/S/00001. However, thereafter there has been no further progress and the petitioner therefore has approached this Court for an appropriate direction to the respondent no.2 for an early conclusion of the proceedings.

¶19

3. Section 18(5) of the MSME Act of 2006 reads as under:

¶20

“18. Reference to Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.—

¶21

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any party to a dispute may, with regard to any amount due under section 17, make a reference to the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.

¶22

(2) On receipt of a reference under sub-section (1), the Council shall either itself conduct conciliation in the matter or seek the assistance of any institution or centre providing alternate dispute resolution services by making a reference to such an institution or centre, for conducting conciliation and the provisions of sections 65 to 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to such a dispute as if the conciliation was initiated under Part III of that Act.

¶23

(3) Where the conciliation initiated under sub-section (2) is not successful and stands terminated without any settlement between the parties, the Council shall either itself take up the dispute for arbitration or refer to it any institution or centre providing alternate dispute resolution services for such arbitration and the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

¶24

¶25

(26 of 1996) shall then apply to the dispute as if the arbitration was in pursuance of an arbitration agreement referred to in sub-section (1) of section 7 of that Act.

¶26

(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council or the centre providing alternate dispute resolution services shall have jurisdiction to act as an Arbitrator or Conciliator under this section in a dispute between the supplier located within its jurisdiction and a buyer located anywhere in India.

¶27

(5) Every reference made under this section shall be decided within a period of ninety days from the date of making such a reference.”

¶28

4. Sub Section 5 of Section 18 of the MSME Act clearly indicates that the reference made under this section should be decided within a period of 90 days. In the instant case, it is almost 10 months that the matter is pending consideration before the respondent no.2 and no decision as such has been taken till date.

¶29

5. Under the given circumstances, the writ petition as of now stands disposed of directing the respondent no.2 Council to consider and decide the application preferred by the petitioner on 06.10.2021 in accordance with law, after due scrutiny and verification of the claim and entitlement of petitioner, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶30

Sd/(P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶31

Khatai

M/s Kaiyumi Printing Press v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Kaiyumi Printing Press v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhay Singh Gill Vs Union of India

General Manager (Personnel / Mp) Vs Subhash Bai

Kodiya Sahkari Prakriya and Vipran Sanstha Maryadit Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Davinder Singh Gandhi

Gurudev Vs Union of India

M/s Shriram Printers and Stationers Vs State of Chhattisgarh