Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bajaj Auto Limited, challenged an award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (respondent no. 4) in a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The dispute involved outstanding payment for parts supplied by respondent no. 3, M/s S. M. Solar Products Ltd., to the petitioner. The court framed two issues: maintainability of the writ petition and the Council's jurisdiction over disputes arising before the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 came into effect. The court held that the writ petition was not maintainable because the Act provides a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 19, which is an efficacious alternative remedy. On the second issue, the court held that the Council has jurisdiction to decide disputes even if they arose prior to the enactment, as the Act applies to all pending disputes. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability - Alternative Remedy - Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Section 19 - Challenge to award of Facilitation Council - Held that writ petition is not maintainable as the Act provides for a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 19, which is an efficacious alternative remedy (Paras 2, 5-7).
B) Jurisdiction - Retrospective Application - Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Section 18 - Dispute arising before 2006 Act - Held that the Council has jurisdiction to decide disputes even if they arose prior to the enactment, as the Act applies to all pending disputes (Paras 2, 8-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition is maintainable against an award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, and whether the Council has jurisdiction to decide a dispute arising before the coming into effect of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006.
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Maintainability of writ petition against MSME Facilitation Council award
- Jurisdiction of Council over pre-2006 disputes
- Alternative remedy under Section 19 of MSMED Act
- 2006
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (10) 36
WRIT PETITION NO. 8496 OF 2019
Shri L. D. Vakil for Petitioner, Shri K. B. Jadhavar A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Shri V. D. Sapkal Senior Advocate i/by Shri Yogesh S. Thorat for Respondent No. 3
The State of Maharashtra, Joint Director of Industries, M/s S. M. Solar Products Ltd., Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Felicitation Council
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging award of Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to quash the award of the Facilitation Council
Filing Reason
Dispute over outstanding payment for parts supplied by respondent no. 3 to petitioner
Previous Decisions
Award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council
Issues
Whether a writ petition is maintainable against an award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council?
Whether the Council has jurisdiction to decide a dispute arising before the coming into effect of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the award is without jurisdiction as the dispute arose before the 2006 Act came into effect.
Respondents argued that the writ petition is not maintainable due to alternative remedy under Section 19 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ petition challenging an award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council is not maintainable because the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 provides a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 19, which is an efficacious alternative remedy. Additionally, the Council has jurisdiction to decide disputes even if they arose prior to the enactment of the Act.
Judgment Excerpts
Maintainability of writ petition challenging the award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council and jurisdiction of the Council to decide a dispute arising before coming into effect of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 are the two issues that need to be determined in the present petition.
Considering the broad two legal issues to be decided in the petition, it is not necessary to narrate the entire factual background under which the dispute between the parties has arisen.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council. The court heard the parties and closed the judgment on 17.10.2022, pronouncing it on 20.10.2022.
Acts & Sections
- Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006: Section 18, Section 19
