ORISSA CHROME EXPORT AND MINING COMPANY LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) From the submissions made both by Mr. Manas Mohapatra, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Sanjit Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate for Orissa Mining Corporation (OMC), it is apparent that there are highly disputed questions of fact regarding the supplies of quantities of chrome ore by the OMC to the Petitioner in terms of the order dtd. 11/3/2019 passed by this Court which in turn was consequent upon the order dtd. 13/9/2012 of the Supreme Court of India.

(2.) The further fact that requires to be accounted for is that the dispute commenced some time in 2003 regarding quantities of chrome to be supplied, whereas now we are in 2022. The further question is whether the Petitioner can legitimately insist on supplies of the chrome at the same rates that were mentioned in the order of the Supreme Court?

(3.) The Court is of the view that the present proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution are not appropriate to address these complex questions of fact which would in turn involve interpretation of the orders of the Supreme Court and this Court. Ideally, they should be attempted to be resolved in a time-bound arbitration.