Santosh Hegde, J. - (1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated 25th Jan. 1999 made in C.W.P. No. 3020/97, the writ petitioners therein have preferred this appeal by leave of this Court.
(2.) Respondent No. 1, Government of India (GOI), took a policy decision in the year 1992 to offer some of its discovered oil fields for development on a joint venture basis. Its decision in this regard was that medium sized oil fields will be offered for developments under the joint venture with the participation of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC)/ the Oil India Limited (OIL) while the small sized oil fields will be offered for development without the participation of the ONGC/OIL. This policy decision was taken on the ground that the country was facing foreign exchange crisis and there was lack of resources to fully develop these oil fields. The GOI was also of the opinion that the domestic crude production was declining and there was a need to augment its production. With the said policy in mind, the GOI invited bids for 12 medium sized oil fields and 31 sized oil fields. In response to the invitation of the GOI in regard to the two medium sized oil fields, namely, Panna and Mukta, as many as 8 consortia offered their bids and after preliminary technical, evaluation of those bids, discussions, were held with the bidders and based on such discussions, the GOI shortlisted respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and another consortium of Hyundai Heavy Industries. Eassar Oil Limited, Dan Offshore and Albion International. Sometime in Oct. 1993, these two consortia were called for further negotiations by the Negotiating Committee to finalise the contract and after such negotiations and evaluation of the bids on the recommendations of the said Committee, the bid of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 was accepted in Feb. 1994 and a Letter of Award (LOA) was issued to the said consortium. As per this award , the oil fields, Panna and Mukta - were agreed to be given to the said consortium with a participating interest of 30 % each to respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in association with the ONGC which was given a share of 40%. The said contract provided that the GOI had the first option to purchase up to 100% of the production of oil from these fields at an international market price to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the contract. It further provided that the international price shall be determined with reference to one or more freely traded international market prices which bear resemblance to the produce crude in terms of standard parameters such as gravity, sulphur content, yield etc. which are critical to the market value of the crude. The contract, price to be paid to the contractor had to be the price of Brent (DTD) crude with a discount of $ 0.10 cents per barrel. Brent is said to be similar sweet crude which is freely traded in the international market. The actual contract termed as 'Profit Sharing Contract'(PSC) was signed by the GOI and the consortium of respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in regard to Panna and Mukta oil fields on 22-12-1994.
(3.) The appellants herein challenged the awarding of this contract before the High Court of Delhi on 26th July, 1997 seeking the following reliefs :- (a) direct a thorough criminal investigation into this deal by an appropriate agency to be supervised by a senior independent person such as a retired Judge of a High Court or the Supreme Court, and (b) direct the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to take further follow up action by way of criminal prosecution and departmental proceedings against officials who have played a corrupt or improper role in the award of the contract for the Panna - Mukta oil fields; and (c) order the cancellation of the contract for the Panna - Mukta oil fields to the joint venture led by RIL - Enron. ;