TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion does not call for any interference in the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The grievance of the Petitioners is primarily of a possible illegal action based exclusively on the findings and recommendations of the Report. If these grievances are addressed in terms of the statements noted above of the Union and the State, there is no particular reason why this Court should still exercise its writ jurisdiction and quash and set aside the report. Petition disposed off. - Writ Petition Nos. 606, 644/2014, 176, 183, 507, 571/2015 & 516, 517/2019 - - - Dated:- 2-7-2019 - S.C. Gupte And Nutan D. Sardessai, JJ. Mr. A.F. Diniz, with Mr. Ryan da Piedade Menezes, Gina Almeida, and Nigel Fernandes, Advocates for the Petitioner. Mr. Mahesh Amonkar And Mr. Pravin Faldessai for Respondent. ORAL JUDGMENT S.C. Gupte, This group of petitions challenges a commission of inquiry report called The Third Report dated 14 October 2013 under the Commission of Inquiry Act of Mr. Justice M.B. Shah (Retired) , in so far as it relates to purported findings and recommendations in it vis-a-vis the Petitioners. The petitions also seek a writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade and export of such ore done illegally or without lawful authority and the persons responsible for the same. The Commission was expected to also recommend remedial measures to prevent such mining, trade, transportation and export done illegally or without lawful authority. 4. The Commission appears to have prepared its report into three parts, two of which were already before the Supreme Court of India and considered by it when a matter was carried by Goa Foundation in a Public Interest Petition before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, on the basis of the Commission report, praying inter alia for directions to the Union of India as well as State of Goa to take steps for termination of mining leases issued in the State in violation of various laws and for incidental and consequential reliefs. These two parts of the report are not the subject matter of the present petitions. 5. What is challenged in the present petitions is the Third Report of the Commission, prepared sometime in October, 2013. The Commission has made various observations and recommendations in this report. These pertain to (i) quantities of ore extracted beyond an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns, reputation of the concerned exporter, nature of the contract whether long term or short term, financial status of the counter- parties, etc. which may have a substantial bearing on the export price. The Petitioners have referred to the tables and annexures forming part of the Commission report in this behalf and contrasted them with indices, such as Platt's price index, to buttress their submissions. It is submitted that even well-known international price indices would indicate a price difference of as much as $ 4 for the same Fe grade. It is submitted that the price of ore thus depends not merely on the Fe grade of its contents, but also several other factors indicated above. It is submitted that the Commission has also failed to appreciate that it is the date of the contract of sale which is relevant for fixation of price and not the date of shipping of the export goods. It is submitted that the Commission has not considered at all the dates of the contracts whilst arriving at its findings on under-invoicing. Various other infirmities in the analysis of the Commission have also been pointed out. In other words, the comparison made by the Commission is said to be essent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Writ Petition Nos. 176/2015, 183/2015, 516/2019 and 517/2019, offers additional factual comments on the report, particularly concerning the insinuation therein of evasion of export duty on the part of his clients. Learned Counsel submits that there was no export duty in the case of exports made by his clients around the relevant time. Learned Counsel relies on the judgments of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the cases of Manjinder Kaur vs. State of Punjab and anr., CWP No.1272of 2018 dated 27.8.2018; and Bhupinder Singh Hooda vs. State of Haryana and ors., reported in MANU/PH/0119/2019 in support of his submission that any report of a Commission of Inquiry made in contravention of Sections 8-B and 8-C of the Act ought to be treated as non est and quashed. 9. Mr. Faldessai, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State of Goa, submits that when the first two parts of the report of the Commission were before the Supreme Court in the petition filed by Goa Foundation, the State of Goa made a categorical assertion, which is recorded by the Supreme Court in paragraph 14 of its Judgment, to the effect that no action would be taken by the Government a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no tangible reason why this Court should take up the report of the Commission for a judicial scrutiny under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 13. In the case of Lal Krishna Advani and ors. (supra), the mandate of the Commission was for inquiring into the facts and circumstances leading to the communal disturbances in the District of Bhagalpur and adjacent areas on 24/10/1989 and thereafter. The Commission was called upon, in particular, to inquire into whether those disturbances were pre-planned and if so, the elements responsible for the same; whether the measures taken by the district administration to prevent and deal with the disturbances were timely and adequate, and fixation of the responsibility for lapses, if any, in that behalf; and, finally, to generally recommend measures for preventing recurrence of such disturbances and other related matters. Whilst dealing with these matters, the Commission made some stray observations against Shri Lal Krishna Advani, who is a well known public figure. These remarks made in the report were, according to Patna High Court (when the matter was carried in a writ petition before it), were uncalled for and not ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iry and determination of the nature and extent of mining, trade and transportation of ore done illegally or without lawful authority, and the extent to which regulatory systems could be said to have failed to deter and detect these illegalities. The Commission was not inquiring into the acts of commission or omission of any particular individual, but had to go into the conceived illegalities in a broad-brush manner so as to report them and the approach of regulatory systems in response thereto. In fact, in its very opening statement, the Commission has made it clear that it was not in a position to finalise illegalities or irregularities with regard to the export of ores by individual lessees or their representatives or traders comprehensively due to time constraints. It, therefore, proceeded to focus its attention to some of the general aspects of the controversy. It noticed differences in the prices offered by different exporters upon comparison of various indices. As indicated above, this report is by no means a binding pronouncement either on facts or on law. It is not an adjudication; it is merely a fact finding exercise for the purpose of reporting to the appointing authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
