JUDGMENT : Prasanna B. Varale, C.J. 1. Heard Sri Vikram Huilgol, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. The learned Senior Counsel submits that the appellant is before this Court raising a very limited issue in challenge to the order of the learned Single Judge dated 08.08.2022 and the ground raised by the appellant is non-application of mind in the decision of the Empowered Standing Committee in its order dated 22.01.2011. The learned Senior Counsel was also fair enough to submit that though this very ground in very words is not raised in the appeal, the grounds raised in the appeal are inclusive of the ground of non-application of mind of the Committee and the order suffering on account of non competence of the Committee. 3. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the appeal are as follows: The appellant being a contractor was awarded a contract for construction and maintenance of village roads. On finding certain difficulties and delay in execution of the work, the Competent Authority and the Chief Operating Officer, Karnataka Rural Road Development Agency, Bengaluru passed an order on 27.12.2006. The terms of the agreement dated 06.10.2004 between the parties specifically refers to a scheme of dispute redressal under Clause 24 under the caption “Dispute Redressal System.” 4. Clause 24 of the agreement is reproduced in the appeal memo and the same reads thus: “24. Dispute Redressal System 24.2 Either party will have the right of appeal against the decision of the competent authority to the standing empowered committee if the amount appealed against exceeds rupees one lakh. 24.3 The composition of the empowered standing committee will be: (i) One official member, chairman of the Standing empowered committee, not below the rank of additional secretary to the State Government. (ii) One official member not below the rank of chief engineer. (iii) One non official member who will be ethnical expert of chief engineer's level selected by contractor from a panel of three persons given to him by the employer. 24.4 The Contractor and the employer will be entitled to present their case in writing duly supported by documents. If so requested, the standing empowered committee may allow one opportunity to the contractor and the employer for oral agreements for a specified period. 24.4 The Contractor and the employer will be entitled to present their case in writing duly supported by documents. If so requested, the standing empowered committee may allow one opportunity to the contractor and the employer for oral agreements for a specified period. The empowered committee shall give decision within a period of ninety days from the date of appeal, failing which the contractor can approach the appropriate court for resolution of the dispute.” 5. In view of this Scheme, the appellant approached the Committee and the Committee, vide order dated 22.01.2011 upheld the order of the Competent Authority to take necessary action to recover balance amount of Rs.17,49,130/- from the appellant. The copy of the order of the Committee along with the proceedings of the meeting of the Committee is placed on record at Annexure-A. 6. On perusal of the order of the Committee, it is revealed that the Committee made reference only to the contentions raised before the Committee and the order of the Competent Authority. Only on the basis of the Executive Engineer's denial, the Committee arrived at the conclusion that there are no proper reasons for delay in completing the work relating to the contract namely PMGSV Phase 3 Package No. KN26-07 within the stipulated time without proper reasons. At the cost of repetition, we may state that the order fails to show independent reasons assigned by the Committee and as such, it can safely be said that the order of the Committee suffers from non-application of mind. On this ground alone, the appeal is partly allowed. The matter is remitted back to the Empowering Standing Committee for a decision a fresh. The Empowering Standing Committee to decide the appeal filed by the appellant a fresh as expeditiously as possible and not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after providing equal opportunity of hearing to the parties. Needless to state that the composition of the Committee shall be as per Clause 24.3 of the agreement. It is expected that the parties will extend full and proper co-operation to the Committee for disposal of the appeal in the timeline fixed by this Court. 7. Authenticated copy of the order be provided to the learned counsel appearing for the parties.