Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. - (1.) Mr. Das, Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 10, who is the Director of the respondent No. 2, has taken a preliminary objection to entertaining of and/or proceeding with this writ petition filed by the Revenue against the decision of the Settlement Commission on the strength of a judgment of the Supreme Court. He contends that the Revenue has come up with this writ petition against the decision of the Settlement Commission which is another wing of the Government Department and has been formed by and under the provisions of the Customs Act. According to him, the ratio of the aforesaid Supreme Court decision will have full application as the idea behind pronouncing the aforesaid judgment by the Apex Court was that the Government of India and/or its intra Department or the Government Undertaking should not fight against each other in order to save the valuable Government exchequer. According to him, the writ petition should be directed to be placed before the High Power Committee as envisaged under the aforesaid Supreme Court decision. The said Supreme Court decision was rendered following the earlier two pronouncements of the same Court, reported in 1992 (2) Supp. SCC 432 and 1995 Supp. IV SCC 541 = 1992 (61) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). Mr. Das has laid emphasis on paragraphs 3 and 4 of the said decision which I feel, should be reproduced hereunder :- "3. We direct that the Government of India shall set up a Committee consisting of representatives from the Ministry of Industry, the Bureau of Public Enterprises and the Ministry of Law, to monitor disputes between Ministry and Ministry of Government of India, Ministry and public sector undertaking of the Government of India and public sector undertakings in between themselves, to ensure that no litigation comes to Court or to a Tribunal without the matter having been first examined by the Committee and its clearance for litigation. Government may include a representative of the Ministry concerned in a specific case and one from the Ministry of Finance in the Committee. Senior officers only should be nominated so that the Committee would function with status, control and discipline. 4. It shall be the obligation of every Court and every Tribunal where such a dispute is raised hereafter to demand a clearance from the Committee in case it has not been so pleaded and in the absence of the clearance, the proceedings would not be proceeded with."
(2.) Mr. Pal, Ld. Sr. Counsel for the company, supports and adopts the argument of Mr. Das on this point so far as this writ petition is concerned. Mr. Kapoor, Ld. Addl. Solicitor General, appearing with Mr. Ghose, Ld. Sr. Counsel and Mr. Samaddar, Ld. Counsel, has found serious fallacy in the argument of Mr. Das. He contends that aforesaid decision cited by Mr. Das is not applicable at all on the facts and circumstances of this case. Paragraphs mentioned above are very clear that litigant must; be Government of India on one hand and on the other, Government of India Undertaking or any other Department of Government of India. He contends here the Settlement Commission is not a litigant at all. It is an adjudicatory body as formed under the special provisions of the Customs Act by the Parliament. His further contention is that the litigant here is the Revenue Department on one hand and on the other hand the private respondents, namely, clients of Mr. Pal and Mr. Das in reality. It is absurd to suggest that Settlement Commission can partake the character of litigant having passed an order in exercise of jurisdiction under the statute. If this logic is accepted, he contends, then in each and every matter dealt with by the Tribunal formed under the statute, will have to be referred to the High Power Committee.
(3.) He has also drawn my attention to the earlier two decisions of the Supreme Court, earliest one being 1992 (2) Supp. SCC 432 = 1992 (61) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). The then Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Ranganath Mishra while evolving this procedure has decided that Government, should not waste money in fighting litigation against its own Undertaking and/or its own Department. As such the body, namely, High Power Committee was formed for settlement of the disputes.;