Recovery mechanism for MSME awards upheld as a valid, remedial procedure, not repugnant or discriminatory.

Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council Rules, 2006 was framed under the general rule-making power in section 30 of the MSMED Act to support speedy recovery for micro and small enterprises. It was treated as an ancillary, remedial procedure aligned with the statutory object, and the recovery mechanism as arrears of land revenue was considered a reasonable method rather than a harsh or discriminatory one. The Court also noted that the rule's recovery route and enforcement under section 36(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act both serve recovery of the awarded amount, and the availability of alternative or even inconsistent remedies does not by itself create repugnancy. Rule 5 was upheld as intra vires and not violative of Article 14.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council Rules, 2006 was ultra vires, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, or repugnant to section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: Rule 5 was framed under the general rule-making power in section 30 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 to carry out the object of speedy recovery for micro, small and medium enterprises. The remedy under the rule and the enforcement mechanism under section 36(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are both directed to recovery of the awarded amount, though through different procedures. The existence of alternative or even inconsistent remedies does not by itself create repugnancy, and the award-holder may elect the remedy to be pursued. The provision was treated as ancillary and remedial, intended to further the statutory object, and the recovery as arrears of land revenue was held to be a reasonable procedure, not harsh or discriminatory.

Conclusion: Rule 5 was upheld as intra vires and not violative of Article 14 or repugnant to the central enactment.

---