SUPREME COURT TAKES SUO MOTU COGNIZANCE OF INVALIDITY OF APPOINTMENT UNDER SECTION 12(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996. In this case Haryana Space Application Centre (HARSAC) and Anr. v. M/s Pan India Consultants Pvt Ltd. The SC observed that even though a period of over 4 years had elapse since the constitution of the tribunal on September 14, 2016, the Award had not been pronounced so far. This was despite the tribunal recording that it was ready to pronounce the award on two separate occasions. The SC took suo motu cognizance of contravention of Section 12(5) of the Act. The SC held that that the appointment of the Principal Secretary, Government of Haryana as the nominee arbitrator of the Appellant, which was a Nodal Agency of the Government of Haryana, would be invalid under Section 12(5) read with the Seventh Schedule of the Act. The SC further ruled that Section 12(5) read with the Seventh Schedule was a mandatory and non-derogable provision of the Act. The SC appointed a fresh sole arbitrator as the substitute arbitrator. The newly appointed sole arbitrator was to conduct the proceedings in continuation from the present stage of proceedings and pass the Award within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of SC’s present order. Since the introduction of Section 12(5) to the Act vide the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2015, the SC has time and again held in favor of ‘arbitrator neutrality’. Reddy & Reddy Law Firm has a forte in handling Arbitration matters. They have an experienced team of lawyers ready to assist in all your disputes.