IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3544 of 2009 Bihar State Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd., A Company duly registered as such at Sone Bhawan, Veerchand Patel Path, Patna through its Managing Director Shri Lallan Prasad Sinha. ……Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary cum Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary cum Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Sasaram Circle, Sasaram, District-Rohtas. 4. The Commercial Taxes Officer (In-charge), Sasaram Circle, Sasaram, Rohtas. ……Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Adv. : Mr. Naresh Dixit, Adv. : Mr. Raju Giri, Adv. : Mr. Kunal Tiwary, Adv. For the Respondents : Sri Lalit Kishore, AAG-III. : Sri Satyabir Bharti, AC to AAG-III. -------------- 04. 30.07.2009 Heard the parties. By the order passed by this Court on 16.04.2009 this Court noticed a judgment of the Supreme Court and on that basis the Commercial Tax Department of Government of Bihar was directed to place the controversy between the parties i.e. between the said department and the petitioner which is an undertaking of the State of Bihar, before a Committee constituted by notification issued by the Chief Secretary dated 05.03.2009, for its proper resolution at the - 2 - level of Government itself. Due to some inadvertent error the decision of the Supreme Court cited in earlier order suffered from typographical error and the same requires correction. By way of correction it be noted that the said judgment is in the case of Oil and Natural Gas Commission and Anr. Vs. Collector of Central Excise reported in 1992 Suppl. (2) SCC 432. On behalf of petitioner a grievance has been raised that so far the Commercial Tax Department has not complied with the order dated 16.04.2009 and no step has been taken to place the matter before the Competent Committee which is to decide the controversy between the parties after notice to the petitioner. Learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 submitted that the dispute could not be referred by the Commercial Tax Department because the liability upon the petitioner arises under a statute and in the statute there is no provision for referring the matter before a Committee constituted under administrative powers. After going through the judgment of the Apex - 3 - Court we find that reference of disputes between two departments or undertakings of the same Government to a Committee for its resolution has been ordered by the Apex Court as a matter of public policy so that “they should not fight their litigations in Court by spending money on fees of counsel, Court fees, procedural expenses and wasting public time. Court’s are maintained for appropriate litigations. Court’s time is not to be consumed by litigations which are carried on either side by public expenses from the source.” It is in the light of such settled principles of public policy that this Court by its earlier order directed the Commercial Tax Department to place the matter before the Committee already constituted by the State Government and noted in order dated 16.04.2009. The action of the Commercial Tax Department in not placing the matter before the Committee amounts to disobedience of the order of this Court but we ignore it only in this case because the same appears to be under some misconception of law. Learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 has - 4 - then submitted that the writ petition itself be disposed of so that the Committee may finally decide the dispute one way or the other and the decision of the Committee shall be made binding on both the parties so that no unnecessary litigation at public expenses continues in this Court. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner has also prayed that the matter be disposed of but in order to protect the petitioner Corporation from any harassment by the Commercial Tax Department, he has prayed that the interim order passed on 16.04.2009 prohibiting coercive steps against the petitioner be continued till the matter is decided by the Committee. In view of aforesaid facts and submissions the writ petition is finally disposed of with direction to the petitioner and Commercial Tax Department to present their views before the Committee within a period of four weeks from today. On receipt of views of both the departments, the Committee shall proceed to find a solution to the dispute in accordance with law as early as possible preferably within two months thereafter. It is expected that none of the parties shall thereafter approach - 5 - this Court with litigation against a department or undertaking of the State Government itself. It is clarified that both the parties must approach the Committee by placing their cases/claims along with a copy of this order before the senior most member of the Committee i.e. the Chief Secretary within the time indicated above. Let a copy of this order be given to learned counsel of both the parties. Vikash/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.)