Allahabad High Court
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT OF HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS KARAMCHARI SEHKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the petition is to be disposed as it seeks enforcement of an interim order that is stayed, and therefore the relief cannot be granted.
Summary
The petitioners, Committee of Management of Hindustan Aeronautics Karamchari Sehkari Awas Samiti Ltd and another, sought a mandamus directing the respondents to enforce an interim order dated 8 May 2025 issued by an arbitral tribunal, despite a later order of this Court on 30 May 2025 staying the reference. The petition was filed as a consequential prayer to Writ C No. 18168 of 2025, which itself stayed the reference. The respondents argued that the petition was misconceived because the reference was stayed and therefore the interim order could not be enforced. The Court observed that the prayer merely sought clarification on the operation of an interim order that is itself stayed, and that the stay necessarily includes the interim order. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition without entertaining the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition seeking clarification and enforcement of an interim arbitral order can be entertained when the main reference has been stayed by the Court.
Subjects
- interim order
- stay of proceedings
- mandamus
- writ petition
- jurisdiction
- clarification
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 44354 of 2025
Committee Of Management Of Hindustan
Aeronautics Karamchari Sehkari Awas Samiti Ltd
And Another .....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Misra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ravi Anand Agarwal
Court No. - 29
HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J.
HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J.
1. Mr. H.R. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of
petitioner and submits, on moving the petition we had directed, inter-alia,
for it to be connected with Writ C no. 18168 of 2025. He submits, this is
because present writ petition contains consequential prayer regarding
operation of interim order dated 8th May, 2025 passed by the arbitral
tribunal, when the reference itself has been stayed. He seeks order in
terms of prayer (i). The prayer is reproduced below.
"i- to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus
restraining the respondents to enforce the interim direction of the
Arbitrator in Election Petition dated 08.05.2025 in the face of the detailed
order dated 30.05.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in writ petition No.
18168 of 2025 staying the further proceeding in the Election Petition
referring to the legal."
2. Mr. Subhranshu Shekhar, learned advocate, Additional Chief Standing
Counsel appears on behalf of State. Mr. Ravi Anand Agarwal, learned
advocate appears on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3. He submits, the
writ petition is misconceived and it be dismissed because aforesaid Writ
C no. 18168 of 2025 holds up challenge against the reference itself.
Respondent no. 6 goes unrepresented though he was represented in the
main Writ C no. 18168 of 2025.
3. Reproduced below is paragraph 3 from our said order dated 2nd
February, 2026.
"3. We think fit to direct that this writ petition be tagged with
aforesaid Writ C no. 18168 of 2025. It will be considered along with said
writ petition, on adjourned date. In the meantime, issue notice along with
this order on respondent no. 6 by registered post/speed post with
WRIC No. 44354 of 2025
2
A.D. Petitioners will put in requisites."
Prayer (i) in the petition is in nature of clarification regarding operation of
interim order passed in the reference, where the reference itself stands
stayed. The direction for stay necessarily includes stay of the interim
order as well.
4. On above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Arindam Sinha,J.)
(Satya Veer Singh,J.)
March 11, 2026
Jaswant
Digitally signed by :-
JASWANT KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…