Executive Engineer, was given an additional charge of S.E., PWD (B&R), Circle, Bathinda and he was acting as such. Therefore, he exercised the powers of S.E. When Anil Gupta, Executive Engineer PW1 was cross-examined, he admitted that Sh. D.P.S. Virk was holding additional charge of S.E., PWD (B&R) w.e.f. 22.5.2006 by the order of Govt. of Punjab. He thereafter, admitted that later on, vide a letter dated 30.10.2007, the Govt. gave powers to the S.Es holding additional charge to decide arbitration cases. Thus, it was found that in terms of Clause 25-A of the agreement (Ex.D-3), the Arbitrator Mr.D.P.S. Virk was acting as S.E. and was competent to act as an Arbitrator. On the second point of interest, the learned Court below rejected the plea of the appellant on the ground that in the absence of clause of interest, the Arbitrator can allow the same and relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of “Secretary, Irrigation Department Govt. of Orrisa and others Vs. G.C. Roy” AIR 1992 Supreme Court 732. It was also found that Sh. Anil Gupta, Executive Engineer, admitted in cross-examination that as per bill (Ex.D4), interest @ 10% per annum was recommended by him for payment in the award passed by Sh.T.S. Bali and the payment of said bill (Ex.D4) has already been made. Thus, it was held that the award of 15% interest cannot be called a higher rate of interest. Consequently the learned Court below dismissed the objections.
