GSPL INDIA TRANSCOLIMITED v. PETROLEUM & NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARD & ANR.

Delhi High Court · 12 Apr 2018 · 2018:DHC:9115-DB
Sanjiv Khanna; Chander Shekhar
LPA 166/2016
2018:DHC:9115-DB
administrative appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed appellants liberty to file an appeal under Section 33 of the PNGRB Act, 2006 within four weeks, directing the Appellate Tribunal to independently adjudicate the issues including encashment of Performance Bank Guarantee.

Full Text
Translation output
$-12 and 13 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
LPA 165/2016 and CMNos. 9162/2016,18941/2016, 4177/2017
GSPL INDIA GASNETLIMITED Appellant
Through Mr. ParagP. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sumiti Yadava, Mr. Prithvi Raj Chauhan, Mr. Kunal Bahri and Mr. Parminder, Adv.
AND
LPA 166/2016 and CM No. 9167/2016
GSPL INDIA TRANSCOLIMITED Appellant
Through Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sumiti Yadava, Mr. Prithvi Raj Chauhan, Mr. Kunal Bahri and Mr. Parminder, Adv.
VERSUS
PETROLEUM & NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARD & ANR. Respondents
Through Mr. Prashant Bezboruah, Adv. forR-1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
12.04.2018 After some hearing counsel for the parties state that present appeals may be disposed of giving liberty to the appellant to invoke alternative remedy by way of filing an appeal under Section 33 of the
Petroleum & Natural Gas RegulatoryBoard Act, 2006.
ORDER

2. Counsels also state that the Appellate Tribunal would be requested to independently apply its mind without being influenced by any observation in the impugned order dated 09.03.2016 passed by 2018:DHC:9115-DB the SingleJudge.

3. We take the statements on record and dispose of the present appeals.

4. We also clarify that in case an appeal is preferred by the appellant within a period of four weeks, the same would not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. We have passedthe abovesaid order as after dismissal of the writ petition vide order dated 09.03.2016, present intra court appeals were filed, entertained and have remained pending for the last two years. Even an interim order dated 14.03.2016 in favour ofthe appellant waspassed.

5. We have been informed that 25% of the Performance Bank Guarantee has been encashed and vide interim order respondent No.l ha^ assured that they shall not create any lien in respect ofencashed amount. Question o| encashment of25% ofthe Performance Bank Guarantee and all issues would be examined by the Appellate Authority.

6. Interim orders passed would continue for a period of four weeks and thereafter parties shall abide by the orders which would be passed by the AppellateAuthority.

7. Recording the aforesaid, the appeals are disposed of. All the pending applications are also disposed of as infructuous.

APRIL 12,2018 b SANJIV KHANNA, J CHAND^SMKHAR, J