The law in respect of the appointment of an arbitrator under section 11 of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 has undergone transformation: starting from the judgment in Konkan Railway Corporation Limited v. Mehul Construction Co., rendered in the year 2000, to the landmark judgment in Vidya Drolia & Ors. Durga Trading Corporation passed in the year 2021. The scope of section 11 has been in a constant state of flux, where it has been expanded on certain occasions and restricted on other occasions, with the courts attempting to find a solution to the conundrum, ‘Who decides’. While the courts have recognized that there should be minimum interference by the courts at the pre-constitution stage and the intention is to gravitate the parties towards arbitration, it has also been the opinion of the courts that it should not be a mere ministerial function. The article explores the change in the approach of courts in dealing with a petition for an appointment of an arbitrator and the manner in which the Supreme Court has attempted to arrive at a middle path.