Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 9984 of 1997.
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.3.97 of the Delhi High Court in C.W. No. 1085 of 1997)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.3.97 of the Delhi High Court in C.W. No. 1085 of 1997)
Petitioner: Steel Authority of India Ltd.
Respondent: Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors.
Apeal: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 9984 of 1997.
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.3.97 of the Delhi High Court in C.W. No. 1085 of 1997)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.3.97 of the Delhi High Court in C.W. No. 1085 of 1997)
Judges: K. RAMASWAMY & D.P. WADHWA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: May 09, 1997
Appearances:
Mr. D.K. Sinha and Mr. Ajit Pudussery, Advocates for Petitioner.
Head Note:
Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised occupants) Act
Held disputes under this Act are petty disputes and are not directed to be dealt with by High Power Committee appointed to resolve disputes between public sector undertakings and Govt. of India in the Ministry – No mistake committed by High Court – S.L.P. dismissed.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. This special leave petition has been filed against the order of the High Court of Delhi, made on 13.3.1997 in C.W. No. 1085/97.
2. The predecessor of the petitioner-Company had taken on rent the disputed premises, from the Life Insurance Corporation, on 4th floor of Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi. Since the petitioner had not vacated the premises, action was taken for eviction under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. The petitioner challenged the action in the High Court contending that this Court had issued directions in I.A. Nos. 4 and 4 of 1992 in Civil Appeal Nos. 2058-59/88 to constitute a High-power Committee to resolve the disputes between the Public Sector Undertaking and the Government of India of the concerned Ministry, by a committee composed of Cabinet Secretary, Secretary in Ministry of Law and Secretary in the Bureau of Public Sector Undertakings to decide the disputes without needless consumption of time and waste of public funds. The petitioner has sought for such a reference and contends the High-power Committee should have been constituted and decided the matter. We find no force in the contention.
3. The object of issuing direction in those matters was to decide the fiscal disputes in case of major policy matters to save the public money and courts valuable time, and disputes could amicably be settled between the Public Sector Undertaking and the Government of India or the State Governments. The intention was not to resolve the disputes like eviction of a Company or Public Undertaking under Public Premises (Unauthorised Occupants) Act; such petty disputes are not directed to be dealt with by the High level officers whose otherwise duty and time is of very important nature. Under these circumstances, the High Court has not committed any error warranting interference.
4. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.
1. This special leave petition has been filed against the order of the High Court of Delhi, made on 13.3.1997 in C.W. No. 1085/97.
2. The predecessor of the petitioner-Company had taken on rent the disputed premises, from the Life Insurance Corporation, on 4th floor of Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi. Since the petitioner had not vacated the premises, action was taken for eviction under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. The petitioner challenged the action in the High Court contending that this Court had issued directions in I.A. Nos. 4 and 4 of 1992 in Civil Appeal Nos. 2058-59/88 to constitute a High-power Committee to resolve the disputes between the Public Sector Undertaking and the Government of India of the concerned Ministry, by a committee composed of Cabinet Secretary, Secretary in Ministry of Law and Secretary in the Bureau of Public Sector Undertakings to decide the disputes without needless consumption of time and waste of public funds. The petitioner has sought for such a reference and contends the High-power Committee should have been constituted and decided the matter. We find no force in the contention.
3. The object of issuing direction in those matters was to decide the fiscal disputes in case of major policy matters to save the public money and courts valuable time, and disputes could amicably be settled between the Public Sector Undertaking and the Government of India or the State Governments. The intention was not to resolve the disputes like eviction of a Company or Public Undertaking under Public Premises (Unauthorised Occupants) Act; such petty disputes are not directed to be dealt with by the High level officers whose otherwise duty and time is of very important nature. Under these circumstances, the High Court has not committed any error warranting interference.
4. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.
