In Brief
The State of Bihar challenged the appointment of an arbitrator under the national Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, arguing that Bihar's state arbitration law for public works contracts should apply instead. The Supreme Court upheld the appointment, holding that when parties agree in their contract to use the central Act, the state law does not override that choice. The Court also declared unconstitutional a state law provision allowing termination of tribunal members at the government's pleasure, finding it violated constitutional fairness protections since arbitrators perform quasi-judicial functions requiring independence and impartiality.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.