UTTAR PARIA BRAHMAPUTRA JALA PARIBAHAN CO Vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIVISION, ULUBARI, GAUHATI & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The authorities empowered to settle Ferry-boats under the Northern India Ferries Act, 1978 and the Control and Management of Ferries Rules, 1968 are statutory authorities. They determine matters affecting "public interest". The subject matter of settlements are "ferry-boats" for the public. The right to collect tolls are sold by "public tender" and they are settled by "public authority". Therefore, it is a public duty of the public servants to "act fairly and reasonably". Naturally, the procedure for settlement must be in consonance with the norms of "procedural fairness". The copulative effect of the nature of the right, the manner of disposal of tenders, the nature and character of the power conferred and the duties imposed on the authorities under "the Act" and "the Rules" are so articulated that it is obvious that they obligate the selling authorities "to act fairly and quasi-judicially". These are the submissions made by Mr. P.C. Kataki learned counsel for the petitioner while questioning the validity of the settlement made in favour of Respondent No. 2.

(2.) The new judicial trend is for procedural fairness in all disciplines. The procedural fairness according to new jurisprudence is omnipresent in all decision-making bodies. At present it is unnecessary to label the proceedings judicial/quasi-judicial administrative, investigatory. We are tempted to quote the relevant statement of law laid down by Lord Justice Sachs in Re Pergamon Press, 1970 (3) All E.R. 525 (541-543):

(3.) The American Court in Goldberg Vs. Kelly, 297 U.S. 254 (1970) extricated the courts from the restrictive cobweb of analytical concept that conferment of licenses or settlements, operating in the field inherently inimical to the public welfare, is not a right but a privilege. The Supreme Court of America in Sugarman Vs. Dougall, 413 U.S. 634 (544) (1973) held: