Order
1. Delay condoned.
2. This is a petition challenging the award of the arbitrator appointed by this Court. Justice D.P. Madon, a former Judge of this Court was appointed as the arbitrator by the order of this Court. The order directed inter alia that the arbitrator would be free if he chooses to make either a speaking or a non-speaking award and be free to give reasons for his award. It appears that Justice Madon made the award on January 21, 1987 after hearing all the parties. The validity of non-speaking awards is under challenge in this Court and the question has been referred to the Constitution Bench of this Court, and is pending there. The award of Justice Madon is under challenge. It is contended that the award is bad and is a non-speaking award. On the other hand, it is submitted that by virtue of the order of this Court the learned arbitrator was not obliged to make any speaking award and thus he did not violate the provisions of law. It is well settled that if the arbitrator has not made a speaking award and if there is no allegation of any misconduct, which there is none, the award can only be challenged if there is any error on the face of the award. But whether the arbitrator is obliged and enjoined by law to make a speaking award and non-speaking awards violate the fundamental rights of the people is a matter which is pending adjudication by a Bench of five learned Judges of this Court. It is appropriate in our opinion that this matter should be finally disposed of after the disposal of CAs Nos. 3137-39 of 1985. The review petition shall be listed to decide what other appropriate relief the petitioner will be entitled to. Out of the various sums adjudicated upon and given in favour of the award holder, a sum of Rs 8 crores and 10 lakhs has been awarded in favour of the award holder on account of the electricity charges. In the interest of justice we direct without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties out of Rs 8 crores and 10 lakhs a refund to M/s Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Ltd. respondent herein a sum of Rs 4 crores and 5 lakhs shall be paid within one month from today. For the rest of Rs 4 crores and 5 lakhs the respondent will be entitled to receive on furnishing bank guarantee by the respondent to the satisfaction of the Registrar of this Court within two months — the petitioner will hand over the same. The existing rates and charges for the supply of electricity fixed by the learned arbitrator will continue except this order will not prevent any increase under any statutory power, if any.
Court Master