WEST BENGAL ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF CALCUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution Order no. 7 dated 18th August, 2008 passed by the learned Estate Officer, Calcutta Port Trust in proceedings No. 26 of 2008 has been assailed. It is contended that by such order the Estate Officer has considered an application filed by opposite party on 18.08.2008 with reference to reply to the show cause under Section 4 of the Act praying for staying of the said proceedings and to remit the suit involved into the proceedings for consideration of the high powered committee for settlement of disputes.

(2.) THE facts in brief leading to such order is that the petitioners, W.B. Electronics Industry Development Corporation Ltd. is a Govt. company. THE respondent no.1, Board of Trustees of the Port of Calcutta is a body corporate constituted under the Major Port Trust Act, 1963. It is a local authority owning land and buildings on both sides of the river Hooghly in and near Kolkata. THErefore, for all practical purposes the dispute centers around two Public Sector Undertakings/Enterprises. Such dispute arose in a proceeding being no. 926 of 2008 under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 initiated by the respondents against petitioner who was called upon to deliver peaceful and vacant possession of the piece and parcel of land measuring about 27348.50 squire meters comprised in 2 belts at Taratala Road and to pay damages for unathorised use of the public premises up to the date of handing over possession. On 18.8.2008 the dispute was taken up for consideration by the Estate Officer while the petitioner filed an application praying for remission of their dispute for consideration by a High Powered Committee and to stay further proceedings in the meantime. By order no. 7 dated 18.8.2008 the Estate Officer rejected such prayer upon hearing both parties. Said order has now been assailed.

(3.) I have carefully considered the rival contentions of both the parties. Petitioner?s claim of referring the matter at the first instance to a High Powered Committee mainly rests on precedent set at rest by the Hon?ble Apex Court in the cases of (i) 1995 Suppl (4) SCC 541 (ONGC ?Vs.- CCE) dated 11.10.1991, (ii) 2004(6) SCC 437 (ONGC ?Vs.- CCE) dated 07.01.1994 and (iii) 2007(7) SCC 39 (ONGC ?Vs.- City and Industrial Developmetn Corporation) dated 20.07.2007. In the first case (supra) it was the solemn verdict of the Hon?ble Apex Court to set up such Committee to ensure that no litigation comes to Court or to a Tribunal without the matter having been first examined by such committee and its clearance for litigation. Other cases echoed the same principle.