ORDER : R.M CHHAYA, J. Heard Mr. G.T Dayani, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Krutik Parikh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. With the consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties the matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith. 3. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order dated 06.12.2010 passed by Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Arbitration Reference No. 20 of 2005, whereby relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of V.A Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited v. Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, reported in (2011) 13 SCC 261, disposed of the Reference before it by holding that it is covered by the said judgment and that the Arbitration Reference was not maintainable before the Tribunal. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Tribunal relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited (supra) has disposed of the Reference as not maintainable. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the judgment in the case of Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority v. L.G Chaudhary Engineers and Contractors, reported in (2012) 3 SCC 495 , submitted that the judgment in the case of V.A Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited (supra) is held to be per incurium and it is further held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the Reference. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also further relied upon the judgment and order dated 26.6.2014 passed in Special Civil Application No. 12632 of 2012 and allied matters, judgment and order dated 23.4.2015 passed in Special Civil Application No. 1086 of 2015 as well as the judgment and order dated 19.8.2015 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 15730 of 2012 and has contended that the petition deserves to be allowed as prayed for and the proceedings of Arbitration Reference No. 20 of 2005 deserve to be restored back to the file of the Tribunal. 5. Learned AGP has supported the impugned order. 6. No other or further submissions are made by the learned Counsels. 7. Considering the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority (supra), the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A Tech. 5. Learned AGP has supported the impugned order. 6. No other or further submissions are made by the learned Counsels. 7. Considering the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority (supra), the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited (supra) in cases where the work contract is over/completed, has become per incurium and therefore, the Arbitration Tribunal was not justified in law in rejecting the Reference. 8. Resultantly, the order dated 06.12.2010 passed by Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Arbitration Reference No. 20 of 2005 is quashed and set aside. The Reference in question is restored back to the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall proceed with the Reference and decide the same in accordance with law after hearing all the parties. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.