SAUMYA DSM INFRATECH LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS intra -court appeal impugns the order dated 6th March, 2014 of the learned Single Judge of dismissal of W.P. (C) No. 2809/2013 preferred by the appellant owing to availability of alternative effective remedy before the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) constituted under the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006 and giving liberty to the appellant to approach the PNGRB. The learned Single Judge, in the impugned order has recorded that it was the contention of the appellant/writ petitioner itself that the jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute subject matter of the filing of the writ petition was with PNGRB but the appellant/writ petitioner was unable to approach the PNGRB due to the Member (Legal) of the PNGRB having superannuated and no appointment of a new Member (Legal) having been made. The learned Single Judge in the impugned order has further noticed that since the filing of the writ petition, Member (Legal) of the PNGRB had been appointed and thus the reason for which the appellant/writ petitioner, instead of approaching the PNGRB had filed the writ petition, did not survive.

(2.) WE have enquired from the senior counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner that when it was the case of the appellant/writ petitioner itself in the writ petition that the dispute subject matter of the writ petition, as per the provisions of the PNGRB Act was to be adjudicated before the PNGRB and that the appellant/writ petitioner had been compelled to file the writ petition only for the reason of the PNGRB being not functional, why has the appellant/writ petitioner preferred this appeal instead of approaching the PNGRB.

(3.) WE have perused the counter affidavit to the writ petition filed by the respondent PNGRB before the learned Single Judge. The said counter affidavit is of the Advisor in the office of the respondent PNGRB and who has verified the contents of the said counter affidavit as true and correct to the best of his knowledge based on official records and on legal advice received. We have enquired from the senior counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner, whether the dispute of the appellant/writ petitioner with the respondent no. 4 Gail Gas Limited and which according to the appellant/writ petitioner is to be adjudicated, is to be adjudicated by the said Advisor of the respondent PNGRB. The senior counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner replies in the negative and in our opinion, rightly so as would be evident from the following provisions: -