Contractual arbitration clause prevails over the State tribunal statute, preserving arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Where a works contract expressly stipulates arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the agreed arbitral mechanism prevails and the Bihar Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 does not displace it. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. and the earlier view in Nilkamal Ltd., and also noted that the Bihar Act had not received Presidential assent. On that basis, the prior direction requiring recourse to the Tribunal could not stand, the review succeeded, and liberty was granted to pursue appointment of an arbitrator under the contractual and statutory regime governing the agreement.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in the presence of an agreement stipulating arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Bihar Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 governs the dispute and whether the earlier direction to approach the Tribunal required recall.

Analysis: The agreement contained a specific arbitration clause providing for resolution under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court applied the Supreme Court's ruling in Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. and the earlier view in Nilkamal Ltd. to hold that the Bihar Act would not displace the agreed arbitral mechanism where the contract itself stipulates the Central Act. The Court also noted that the Bihar Act had not received Presidential assent, and, in the event of conflict, the contractual stipulation and the Central Act would prevail. On that basis, the prior direction requiring recourse to the Tribunal could not stand.

Conclusion: The Bihar Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 was held inapplicable to the dispute, and the petitioner was entitled to seek appointment of an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Final Conclusion: The review succeeded, the earlier direction to move the Tribunal was recalled, and liberty was granted to pursue arbitration under the contractual and statutory regime governing the agreement.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a works contract expressly provides for arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the State works-contract tribunal statute does not apply, and the contractual arbitral mechanism prevails.

---