Remedy and Opinion on Supreme Court Decision

Three Sole Arbitrators were appointed in four similar cases of construction project by government Board on specific request of the claimant contractor without deposit of security amount to the Board which was a pre-requisite in the agreement. Claims were submitted in four different cases. Thereafter a request was raised before arbitrator to not to procced with further proceedings until submission of security amount. In the first instance involving two similar cases, the arbitrator reject the request stating the respondent has waived off his right to object and sec 4 and estopple would operate. In the second instance the arbitrator allowed the application and asked for deposit of security amount. Both orders was challenged before several Courts and finally Hoble High Court passed a judgement where it asked for security to be deposited by the claimant. However, order was passed assuming the application of the respondents to be u/s 17. In the third case, the arbitrator rejected the request stating that the condition was pre-requisite and he had no role with deposit of security amount. He went ahead to pass the award which was later upheld by the Commercial Court. Now the same decision challenged u/s 37 is pending before Hon’ble High Court Haryana. Now the common judgment of High Court Punjab ( CR 7616/2016 ) was challenged in Hble Supreme Court which passed the attached order ( SLP 6999/2018 ). Kindly suggest remedies and options available since the claimant have genuine claims and have no means to deposit security amount.