M/S Hindustan Salts Ltd vs Union Of India & Ors

Bipin Chander Negi, J

The dispute in the writ petition is between a Central Government owned Company and the National Highway Authority of India. National Highway Authority of India is statutory body created by the Central Government under the National Highway Authority of India Act, 1988. Both are fighting with each other in the Court.

In the aforesaid backdrop, it would be appropriate to refer to judgment cited in (2003) 3 Supreme Court Cases, 472, titled Chief Conservator of Forests of Govt. of A.P. vs. Collector and others, relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:-

“It was not contemplated by the framers of the Constitution or the C.P.C. that two departments of a State or the Union of India will fight a litigation in a court of law. It is neither appropriate nor permissible for two departments of a State or the Union of India to fight litigation in a court of law. Indeed, such a course cannot but be detrimental to the public interest as it also entails avoidable wastage of public money and time. Various departments of the Government are its limbs and, therefore, they must act in coordination and not in confrontation. Filing of a writ petition by one department against the other by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court is not only against the propriety and polity as it smacks of indiscipline but is also contrary to the basic concept of taw which requires that for suing or being sued, there must be either a natural or a juristic person.

In the aforesaid backdrop, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India has placed on record Office Memorandum dated 31.3.2020. The aforesaid Office Memorandum contains instructions in order to avoid inter departmental litigations including Central Government owned Company and authorities to resolve the said dispute(s) amicably through a mechanism for resolution of dispute provided therein. Accordingly, a direction is issued to respondent No.1 to convene a meeting to resolve the controversy inter se the parties.

Needless to say, dispute resolution in the case at hand shall strictly be done in consonance with the procedure detailed in Office Memorandum dated 31.3.2020. The petitioner may approach respondent No.1 within one week from today. Taking into account the nature of controversy between the parties, hearing of the matter may be expedited in the interest of justice.

In view of the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of accordingly.

List for compliance on 31.3.2024.

All pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.