CWP No.4581 of 2004 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4581 of 2004 Date of Order: 30.10.2009 Bhakra Beas Management Board and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. D.S. Nehra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate for the petitioners. Mrs. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab for the respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR,J The instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against order dated 17.12.2003 (Annexure P.7) passed by Government of Punjab, Department of Transport requiring the petitioners to pay arrears of Special Road Tax as calculated in accordance with the provisions of Punjab Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1924. Petitioner No.1-Board is Multi-State Board constituted by Central Government under Section 79(1) read with Section 80(6) of the Punjab Re-organisation Act, 1966 constituted for the administration, maintenance and operating of Bhakra Nangal and Beas Projects in order to CWP No.4581 of 2004 #2# cater to the water and electricity demand of the States of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan upon the reorganisation of the erstwhile State of Punjab. It took up work, which essentially was to be performed by the aforesaid States. Petitioner No.1-Board owns a fleet of Buses, Jeeps etc in order to transport its employees and material from their residences to the work site. Facility provided to the employees of the Board is free of charge and nobody else is entitled to enjoy the aforesaid facilities except the employees of the Board. The Board has submitted that the vehicles are used solely on non-commercial basis as no tariff/charges are imposed upon the employees for facility of transportation to work site. Respondent-State of Punjab vide impugned order dated 17.12.2003 (Annexure P.7) has demanded tax on those vehicles under the Taxation Act. A written statement has also been filed by the respondent-State of Punjab. There is no denial of fact that the dispute is between statutory Board and the respondent-State. There is no clearance on record from the High Powered Officers' Committee required to be set up for resolving such dispute in pursuance of the directions issued by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. CCE 1992 Supp.(2) SCC 432 & Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. CCE 1995 Supp.(4) SCC 541. Hon'ble the Supreme Court has reminded that the dispute between two public sector undertaking and State has to be cleared by High Powered Officers' Committee. The aforesaid principles were also reiterated in a later judgment in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd v. Chairman, Central Board, Direct Taxes (2004) 6 Supreme Court Cases 431. The basic object of referring dispute to the High Powered Committee is to avoid frivolous litigation and also to reach an amicable settlement. It CWP No.4581 of 2004 #3# further prevents docket explosion to the already over burdened courts. Similar observation has been made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd's case (supra), which reads thus: “Undoubtedly, the right to enforce a right in a court of law cannot be effaced. However, it must be remembered that courts are overburdened with a large number of cases. The majority of such cases pertain to government departments and/or public sector undertakings. As is stated in Chief Conservator of Forests case it was not contemplated by the framers of the Constitution or CPC that two departments of a State or the Union of India and /or a department of the Government and a public sector undertaking fight a litigation in a court of law. Such a course is detrimental to public interest as it entails avoidable wastage of public money and time. These are all limbs of the Government and must act in coordination and not confrontation. The mechanism set up by this Court is not, as suggested by Mr. Andhyarujina, only to conciliate between the government departments. It is also set up for purposes of ensuring that frivolous disputes do not come before courts without clearance from the High-powered Committee. If it can, the High Powered Committee will resolve the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved the Committee would undoubtedly give clearance. However, there could also be frivolous litigation proposed by a department of the Government or a public sector undertaking. This could be prevented by the High Powered Committee. In such cases, there is no question of resolving the dispute. The Committee only has to refuse permission to litigate. No right of the department/public sector undertaking is affected in such a case. The litigation being of a frivolous nature must not be brought to court. To be remembered that in almost all cases one or the other party will not be happy with the decision of the High- Powered Committee. The dissatisfied party will always claim that its rights are affected, when in fact, no right is affected. The Committee is constituted of highly placed officers of the Government, who do not have an interest in the dispute, it is thus expected that their decision will be fair and honest. Even if the department/public sector undertaking finds the decision CWP No.4581 of 2004 #4# unpalatable, discipline requires that they abide by it. Otherwise the whole purpose of this exercise will be lost and every party against whom the decision is given will claim that they have been wronged and that their rights are affected. This should not be allowed to be done.” In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the High Powered Committee of the Officers of the Board as well as the respondent-State to take cognizance of the dispute and resolve the same as per direction of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in cases of Oil and Natural Gas Commissioner's case(supra) and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd's case (supra). ( M.M. KUMAR ) JUDGE October 30, 2009 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE