7. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that pursuant to the objection raised by the petitioner on 26.07.2021, the respondent authorities had written to the petitioner vide their letter dated 19.08.2021 stating that though Shri R.P. Singhal, ADG(ARB) is a serving officer and was appointed as an arbitrator, the petitioner had never objected to the agreement for appointment of a serving officer as arbitrator nor raised any objection prior to appointment of aforesaid Shri Singhal, as the sole arbitrator. Mr. H. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 makes it very clear that the aforesaid bar raised under sub-section (5) of Section 12 will not apply if there is a waiver to the applicability of the sub-section by the other party. In the present case, since the petitioner had never raised any objection, it can be deemed that the petitioner had waived any objection to appointment of the said sole arbitrator, respondent No.4, though he is an employee of the respondent Nos.2 and 3, hence, his appointment as an arbitrator cannot be barred.
