Supreme Court Upholds Delhi HC Refusal To Recall Arbitrator In Vedanta–GSPC Gas Block Dispute
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed special leave petitions in the dispute between Vedanta Ltd (Cairn Oil & Gas Division) and Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd (GSPC). The court refused to interfere with the Delhi High Court's order declining to recall its earlier Section 11 appointment of an arbitrator and rejecting a related modification plea.
Dismissing the petitions, a bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan observed, “We do not find a good ground to interfere with the impugned order/judgment in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the special leave petitions stand dismissed.”
The controversy arose from proceedings under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The Delhi High Court had appointed an arbitrator in disputes arising out of a Gas Sales Agreement relating to a block in Rajasthan.
Vedanta, as the operator of the block, conducted a bidding process in December 2022 for the sale of gas. It issued a Request for Proposal along with a draft GSA containing an arbitration clause. GSPC participated in the bidding process and was declared a successful bidder.
Vedanta contended that a binding contract was concluded upon acceptance of the bid. Disputes later arose regarding execution of the GSA. Vedanta then invoked arbitration.
When GSPC did not nominate an arbitrator, Vedanta approached the Delhi High Court under Section 11 of the Act. The High Court appointed an arbitrator.
GSPC filed a recall application. The High Court rejected it. The court held that issues relating to arbitrability or the nature of the arbitration could be raised before the arbitral tribunal under Section 16. It further held that the recall application was not maintainable.
Vedanta had also sought modification of the court's direction on arbitrator fees. That application was dismissed as well.
The January 23, 2026 order of the High Court was challenged before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court declined to interfere and dismissed the petitions.
For Petitioner: Senior Advocates Shyam Diwan, Dhruv Mehta and Jayant K. Mehta, Advocates Aspi Kapadia, Sonal Gupta, Pratyusha Priyadarshini, Ankur Singhal, Piyush Joshi, Sumiti Yadav, Meghna Sengupta, Shriya Kesharwani, Dilpreet Singh Dardi, Sulabh Rewari, Vasudha Sharma, Kartikeya Sharma, Om Shelat and Shubhansh Thakur, Parekh & Co., AOR, Pritha Srikumar Iyer, AOR.
For Respondent: Senior Advocates Dhruv Mehta, Jayant K. Mehta and Shyam Diwan, Advocates Sulabh Rewari, Vasudha Sharma, Kartikeya Sharma, Om Shelat, Shubhansh Thakur, Aspi Kapadia, Sonal Gupta, Pratyusha Priyadarshini, Piyush Joshi, Sumiti Yadav, Meghna Sengupta, Shriya Kesharwani, Dilpreet Singh Dardi and Ankur Singhal, Parekh & Co., AOR, Pritha Srikumar Iyer, AOR.