JUDGMENT Alok Sharma, J. - The applicant and the non-applicant- BPCL entered into a distributorship agreement for Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) cylinders on 11.5.2015. Clause 38 (a) of the agreement dated 11.5.2015 provides as under:- 38(a). Any dispute or difference of any nature whatsoever any claim, cross-claim, counter-claim or set off of the Corporation against the Distributor or regarding any right, liability, act, omission or account of any of the parties hereto arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be referred to the sole Arbitration of the Director (Marketing) of the Corporation or of some officer of the Corporation who may be nominated by the Director (Marketing). The Distributor will not be entitled to raise any objection to any such arbitrator on the ground that the arbitrator is an officer of the Corporation or that he has dealt with the matters to which the contract relates or that in the course of his duties as an officer of the Corporation he had expressed views on and or any other matters in dispute or difference. In the event of the arbitrator to whom the matter is originally referred being transferred or vacating his office or being unable to act for any reason, the Director (Marketing) as aforesaid at the time of such transfer, vacation of office or inability to act may in the discretion of the Director (Marketing) designate another person to act as arbitrator in accordance with the terms of the agreement to the end and intent that the original arbitrator shall be entitled to continue the arbitration proceedings notwithstanding his transfer or vacation of office as an officer of the Corporation if the Director (Marketing) does not designate another person to act as arbitrator on such transfer, vacation of office or inability of original arbitrator. Such persons shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the point at which it was left by his predecessor. It is also a term of this Contract that no person other than the Director (Marketing) or a person nominated by such Director (Marketing) of the Corporation as aforesaid shall act as arbitrator hereunder. Such persons shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the point at which it was left by his predecessor. It is also a term of this Contract that no person other than the Director (Marketing) or a person nominated by such Director (Marketing) of the Corporation as aforesaid shall act as arbitrator hereunder. The award of the arbitrator so appointed shall be final conclusive and binding on all parties to the agreement subject to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof and the rules made thereunder for the time being in force shall apply to the arbitration proceedings under this clause. 2. The case of the applicant is that in the course of execution of the said agreement, a penalty of Rs.7,19,191.96/- was imposed on it vide letter dated 22.3.2018 and required to be deposited on or before 21.4.2018 under pain of further LPG supplies being stopped forthwith thereafter. 3. Aggrieved the applicant under its legal notice dated 20.4.2018, required the non-applicant- BPCL for appointment of an independent Arbitrator under clause 38(a) of the agreement dated 11.5.2015 to go into the disputes with regard to the levy of penalty of Rs.7,19,191.96/- on it. No response to the said legal notice dated 20.4.2018 having emanated from the non-applicantBPCL, the application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter 'the Act of 1996') for appointment of an arbitrator has been filed. 4. Reply to the application has been filed by the nonapplicant- BPCL. Mr.J.P. Gupta, its counsel submitted that the arbitration clause 38 (a) in the agreement in issue cannot be invoked as the applicant in terms of clause 11 of the agreement dated 11.5.2015 is bound to adhere to the Marketing Discipline Guidelines, 2017 for LPG Distributorships whereunder in respect of any dispute sought to be raised in regard to the LPG distributorship, an appeal can be filed before the Regional LPG Manager. On the merit of the case, Mr.J.P. Gupta submitted that levy of penalty of Rs.7,19,191.96/- against the applicant is wholly proper and just in view of applicant having breached the conditions of the distributorship agreement dated 11.5.2015. 5. Heard. Considered. 6. On the merit of the case, Mr.J.P. Gupta submitted that levy of penalty of Rs.7,19,191.96/- against the applicant is wholly proper and just in view of applicant having breached the conditions of the distributorship agreement dated 11.5.2015. 5. Heard. Considered. 6. I am afraid there is no force in the contention of Mr.J.P. Gupta, counsel for the non-applicant- BPCL with regard to the arbitration clause 38(a) in the agreement dated 11.5.2015 not being operable for reasons of the appeal provision under the Revised Marketing Guidelines, 2017 for LPG Distributorships binding on the applicant in view of clause 11 of the agreement between the parties. The Revised Marketing Guidelines, 2017 are only an internal mechanism of the working of the distributorship agreement between the parties. They do not override the arbitration clause nor resort to arbitration under clause 38(a) of the agreement dated 11.5.2015 is contingent on first availing the remedy of appeal thereunder. The applicant has the absolute right to invoke the arbitration clause where disputes under the agreement in issue obtain as in the instant case regarding the levy of penalty on it. Besides, in any event all objections as to the arbitrator's jurisdiction can be raised by the non-applicant before the Arbitrator in terms of Section 16 of the Act of 1996. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered view that this application for appointment of an arbitrator is liable to be allowed as despite the applicant's notice for appointment of one in terms of clause 38 (a) of the agreement dated 11.5.2015, the non applicant- BPCL did not agree to the appointment. 8. The application under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996 is accordingly allowed. The dispute between the applicant and the non-applicant is referred to Mr.Pravesh Kumar Bhatia, (Retired District & Sessions Judge), Resident of B-20A, Shiv Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur as the sole arbitrator. He shall adjudicate all disputes/ differences between the parties arising out of and relating to the agreement dated 11.5.2015. Both the applicant and non-applicant will be free to file their claim/ counter claim and replies thereto. The arbitrator shall if warranted make requisite disclosure under Section 11 (6) of the Act of 1996. He shall adjudicate all disputes/ differences between the parties arising out of and relating to the agreement dated 11.5.2015. Both the applicant and non-applicant will be free to file their claim/ counter claim and replies thereto. The arbitrator shall if warranted make requisite disclosure under Section 11 (6) of the Act of 1996. Payment of the cost of Arbitration proceedings and arbitration fee shall be made as per the fourth schedule of the Act of 1996 as amended from time to time and computed as directed by the Arbitrator. 9. A copy of this order be communicated to Mr.Pravesh Kumar Bhatia, (Retired District & Sessions Judge), Resident of B- 20A, Shiv Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur for entering upon the reference and proceed thereon as per the Act of 1996 as amended from time to time and adjudicate all disputes/ differences (factual and legal) between the parties arising out of/ relating to the agreement dated 11.5.2015. 10. The application stands allowed accordingly.