- (1.) The present petition has been filed in this court by Haryana Tourism Corporation Limited (for short, 'the Corporation') impugning the order dated 6.1.2004 passed by learned District Judge, Gurgaon, whereby the petitioner was directed by the court below to file a petition in this court in accordance with High Court Rules and Orders and as per notification dated 17.9.2003. The petition has been filed in this court more than eight years after the passing of the impugned order. Briefly, the facts are that on account of a dispute arising out of execution of work, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurgaon appointed the Arbitrator on 9.2.2001 and directed him to decide the matter within a period of four months. The award was passed by the Arbitrator on 30.6.2001, against which the petitioner filed objections before the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurgaon on 19.11.2003. He referred the matter to learned District Judge, Gurgaon in terms of a notification issued by this court on 17.9.2003 and directed the parties to appear before the District Judge on 27.11.2003. The learned court below, vide order dated 6.1.2004, directed the petitioner to file the matter before this court in accordance with High Court Rules and Orders and notification dated 17.9.2003. The aforesaid order has been impugned before this court.
(2.) Considering the fact that the petition has been filed more than eight years after the passing of the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to assist on this aspect before he proceeds on merits of the controversy. His only submission was that on account of wrong advice, the petitioner was not able to avail of its remedy at appropriate time. After the impugned order was passed by the learned District Judge, the matter was entrusted to a counsel in the High Court, however, thereafter it could not be pursued. The matter came to light only when notice in execution filed by respondent No. 1 was received. The petitioner being a State owned Corporation should not be condemned unheard as public money is involved. The award passed by the Arbitrator is totally arbitrary as no reasons have been assigned for awarding amount to respondent No. 1 on certain counts.
(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this court is not convinced that latitude, as is sought to be claimed in the case in hand, deserves to be granted even to a State owned Corporation which is controlled by senior civil servants and manned by highly paid officers/officials at different levels and also advised by its Legal Department, Law Officers and Legal Advisors, who are paid handsomely regularly. As has been noticed above, on account of a dispute arising out of execution of work, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurgaon appointed the Arbitrator on 9.2.2001 and directed him to decide the matter within a period of four months. The award was passed by the Arbitrator on 30.6.2001, against which the petitioner filed objections before the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurgaon on 19.11.2003. He referred the matter to learned District Judge, Gurgaon referring to notification issued by this court on 17.9.2003. The learned court below, vide order dated 6.1.2004, directed the petitioner to file the matter before this court in accordance with High Court Rules and Orders and notification dated 17.9.2003.;