BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. Vs. CESTAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition is directed against order of the CESTAT (Tribunal) dated 13 -6 -2013 [ : 2013 (32) S.T.R. 219 (Tri. -Del.)] (Anx. 5) rejecting misc. application filed by the petitioner for revocation of the original order passed by the Tribunal dated 10 -7 -2007 holding that since the dispute was related between two agencies of the Government and in the light of judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of ONGC v/s. CCE, reported in : 1992 (61) E.L.T. 3 (S.C), the petitioner must first approach for settlement of its disputes before the Committee constituted by the Apex Court, however, a liberty was granted to revive the appeal as and when such clearance is obtained. As it reveals from the record, the adjudicating authority, after hearing counsel for the parties, passed the order dated 21 -2 -2006 (Anx. 1) directing ad infra: - -

(2.) Against the order of the adjudicating authority, appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) which came to be dismissed on 29 -9 -2006 and against order of the appellate authority i.e. the Commissioner (Appeals), appeal was preferred before the Tribunal and that came to be decided vide order dated 10 -7 -2007 with the direction to the petitioner to raise his grievance before the Committee of disputes which has been constituted under orders of the Supreme Court in the case of ONGC v/s. CCE (supra), however, liberty was granted to revive the appeal as and when such clearance is obtained and obviously after passing of the order, the appeal was consigned to record.

(3.) As it reveals from the record that a misc. application, at later stage, came to be filed by the petitioner for recalling of the order originally passed by the Tribunal that came to be dismissed on 13 -6 -2013 on the premise that the Tribunal directed the petitioner to approach the Committee on Disputes (CoD) constituted under the order of the Apex Court and even if the constitution of the Committee has been set aside by the Apex Court in its later judgment rendered in the case of Electronics Corporation of India Limited v/s. Union of India & Ors., reported in : 2011 (3) SCC 404 : 2011 (21) S.T.R. 593 (S.C.) : 2011 (265) E.L.T. 11 (S.C.), still, the Tribunal was of the view that since the petitioner failed to approach the CoD under directions of the Tribunal, at least, such indulgence cannot now be granted to the petitioner for affording opportunity of hearing to be heard on merits.