PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Through Health Engineering Department vs Messrs
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal by the High Court of the petitioner's appeal in an arbitration matter. The core legal question concerns the alleged misconduct of the arbitrator, specifically regarding the adjournment of the case without fixing a date and the subsequent curtailment of proceedings following the arbitrator's transfer from the office that empowered him to act. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine the question of arbitrator misconduct and the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the controversial adjournment order. Additionally, the Court issued directions regarding the summoning of the missing order, an inquiry into its disappearance, and the conditional stay of execution or payment of the decretal amount pending further orders.
- Whether an arbitrator's adjournment of a case without fixing a next date and subsequent curtailment of proceedings amounts to legal misconduct?
- Can leave to appeal be granted to examine questions of arbitrator misconduct and procedural irregularity?
- What directions may the court issue regarding the disappearance of a judicial or quasi-judicial order?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought; against the dismissal by the High Court, of petitioner's appeal in an Arbitration matter.
2. After hearing both the learned counsel and going through the relevant parts of the statement of the Arbitrator, we consider it a fit case to examine the question of misconduct in the light of the points raised in the petition.
3. It is necessary to note that according to the learned counsel the controversial order dated 27-8- 1971 through which the Arbitrator adjourned the case for further proceedings at Faisalabad, without fixing the next date, is not available. The allegation against the Arbitrator is that in order to give undue advantage to the respondent, the remaining proceedings were curtailed by him due to his transfer from the `Office' by virtue of which alone he could act as Arbitrator. This question would also be examined.
4. We accordingly grant leave to appeal.
5. The order dated 27-8-1971 to be summoned. If not available enquiry about its disappearance should be held and responsible person/s to be dealt with according to law.
6. Regarding petitioner's request for suspension of execution, learned counsel for the respondent states that it has already taken place as the respondent had received the amount. Learned Additional Advocate-General is not certain about it. We accordingly order that if the amount has not yet been paid, it shall not be paid till further orders. They in any case will have to obtain on a separate application regarding investment of the amount for the benefit of the party ultimately succeeding.