(T.S. Thakur and Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.)
DSC-VIACON Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known as DSC Ventures Pvt. Ltd.) _____________________________________________ Petitioner
v.
Lal Manohar Pandey and Ors. ______________________ Respondent(s)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34705-34706/2014, decided on January 27, 2015
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Heard.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents pray for and are granted three weeks’ time to file their counter affidavits.
3. Dr. J.N. Dubey, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 submits that the petitioner has not complied with the order of this Court dated 6th January, 2015 inasmuch as the undertaking filed by them does not state whether they are depositing the amount collected towards road toll in a bank account.
4. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, in reply, draws our attention to an affidavit filed by Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, authorised signatory on behalf of the petitioner-company, to submit that the toll tax collected by the petitioner-company is being deposited in the State Bank of Patiala, Raipur, in the account number, mentioned therein.
5. In that view, therefore, all that we need say is that the petitioner-company shall file a copy of the statement of account indicating the deposits made till date, with a copy to counsel opposite.
6. The controversy in the present proceedings relates to the alleged failure of the petitioner-company to repair a stretch of road measuring 26 kms. From Raipur to Durg. The writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 approached the High Court alleging complete failure on the part of the petitioner-company in carrying out the requisite repairs culminating in the passing of the impugned order by the High Court. It is contended by Mr. Dube that the road condition continues to be poor and that the State Authorities have done nothing meaningful in the matter. This position is not disputed by Mr. Jugal Kisore Gilda, learned Advocate General appearing for the resondent-State of Chhatisgarh, and Mr. A.K. Sanghi, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-U.O.I., according to whom the road is in a bad shape and requires extensive repairs.
7. Be that as it may, the condition of road is not properly reflected in any report based on actual spot inspection. Further directions regarding the collection of toll tax as also possible repair of the road will depend upon the actual condition prevailing on the spot. In that view, we deem it proper to direct that a committee comprising (1) Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Former District Judge of the Raipur, as Chairman and (2) Chief Engineer, Incharge of National Highway Authority of India of that region along with (3) Chief Engineer, Public Works Department of the State of Chhatisgarh as members shall inspect the road and submit a report as to its condition as also the nature and the extent of repairs required for the same. The report shall also estimate the cost of the repairs to be carried out and whether any repair work has at all been carried out at any stage.
8. The committee of officers shall be free to associate a representative of the petitioner-company and respondent no. 1 with the process of inspection but such association shall not be used to cause interference with the process of inspection, measurement or estimation of the cost of repair etc. by the committee.
9. The Committee shall submit a report expeditiously but as far as possible within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is served upon the members of the Committee. We make it clear that the Committee of officers shall also be free to take technical or other advice or help from any other specialised agency, if any such help is required in the completion of the work assigned to them.
10. Post immediately after the report from the Committee is received.
———
