72. Petitioner is an ex-employee of ONGC.

He has alleged that he was promoted to post of EE

(Elect.) in 1987, Dy. SE (E) in 1992 and SE (E) in 1996. His promotion to Chief Engineer was
due in 1999 to which he was selected but his promotion was kept in sealed cover since 2001
because of contemplated initiation off disciplinary action. He was served with Chargesheet dated
5.1.1999 on 9.2.1999 for alleged lapses in a contract pertaining to external electrification of
Panvel Phase - I during 1985 – 87 and he overpaid the Contractor due to which he was served
minor punishment by withholding one increment without cumulative effect because of which the
decision of DPC was kept in seal cover; promotion was not released. Due to alleged mental
humiliation/torture, he applied for retirement under VRS in July 2009 and was relieved on
30.9.2009. Petitioner has prayed to quash the disciplinary action, penalty imposed by ONGC,
departmental enquiry and grant his promotion withheld since 1999 with all arrears/benefits.

ONGC Stand:
The decision of DPC was kept in sealed cover as per Policy.

Status: Matter last listed on 31.07.2017 for final hearing; did not reach. Next date awaited.

73. Parties entered into an Agreement to Lease dated 6.10.1988 i.r.o. plot of land at “H” Block,
BK Complex, near Dharavi admeasuring 10,425 sq. metres. ONGC approached MMRDA with
relevant documents & original Agreement for payment of stamp duty. The Supdt. of Stamps
levied stamp duty aggregating to Rs. 5,04,07,260/- as penalty for non payment of stamp duty on
this Agreement to Lease. ONGC filed the Present writ petition.

Status: Petition filed on 14.1.11 Stay Order issued on 4.3.2011. Matter was lastly listed on
16.03.2015. Final hearing is fixed to be heard in HC. Last hearing held on 18.12.2017; didn't
appear.Next date awaited.

74. The petitioner alleged that while in service, he took leave by procedure of intimation. Due to
prolonged illness, he could not join duty at the end of the leave. On refusal to produce
prescription and reports, he was served a charge sheet dated 16.7.86 for unauthorized absence
from 17.12.84 followed by enquiry and termination Order dated 10.5.88. Petitioner challenged
termination Order before CGIT; on losing, he filed CWP No. 4482 / 1996, to quash dismissal
order which was dismissed. Therefore, he filed present petition.

ONGC Stand:
Petitioner was asked to submit prescriptions by Doctor(required as per Policy). Since he refused,
claim not justified.
Status:Final hearing on 26.06.2015; didn't appear. Next date awaited.

75. Suit No. 299 / 314 / 2001 was filed praying for:
i) decree for vacation, peaceful possession of 10th floor, “B” Nirmal Building occupied by
ONGC admeasuring 2700 Sq. Ft. w.e.f. 1.9.72;
ii) payment of mesne profits @ Rs. 150/- per sq. ft. from 1.08.2000 till handing possession;
iii) Defendants should pay plaintiff Rs. 4,05,000/- p.m. towards interim relief, cost; a proper
person be appointed to take charge of the said premises till pendency of Suit.
ONGC Stand:
ONGC took premises from and paid rent regularly to SICOM, having no direct relation with
actual owner and was made a party in 2004 only; the order of lower court is incorrect.
.
Status: Matter was filed on 15.09.2008, adjourned to 05.03.2019 for say on Exh 58 by plaintiff.

76. Plaintiff has prayed for:

i)decree for vacation, peaceful possession of 10th floor, “C” Nirmal Building occupied by
ONGC admeasuring 2167 Sq. Ft. w.e.f. 1.9.72;
ii)payment of mesne profits @ Rs. 150/- per sq. ft. from 1.08. 2000 till handing possession;
Defendants should pay plaintiff Rs.3,25,050/- p.m. towards interim relief cost.
Appeal has been dismissed with costs. ONGC filed present CRA challenging the Order. Matter
last argued on 1.10.2013.
ONGC Stand:
ONGC took premises from and paid rent regularly to SICOM, having no direct relation with
actual owner and was made a party in 2004 only; the order of lower court is incorrect.
Status: Filed on 15.09.2019. Matter was last heard on 07.02.2019 adjourned to 05.03.2019.

77. ONGC received 13 notices from 13 petitioners filed against ONGC during 2007. ONGC has
acquired land from the pettioners for laying pipelines at Uran. ONGC could get only one copy of
LAR No. 119 / 2007 w.r.t. Kashinath S. Gaikwad. On perusal of said document, it is observed
that Applicant inter alia prayed for land rent @ Rs. 1000/- per gunta and arrears amounting to
Rs. 2.16 Lakhs towards compensation, increase of 10% of compensation for every three years.

Status: ONGC filed Reply on 21.04.2014. Next date awaited.

78. ONGC has filed Appeal against the Judgment dated 19.09.2013 in Civil Suit No. 67 of
2007. Defendant's Consumer complaint claiming refund of application money after non-
allotment shares, which was dismissed for want of jurisdiction, subsequently, Suit No. 67/2007
was filed.ONGC’s contention wasn't accepted. ONGC filed Appeal.

ONGC Stand:
M/s MCS was ONGC's agent to carry out disinvestment work. ONGC had no role in their
allotment as Govt of India, the shareholder, was selling 10% shares from its total of 84 %.

Status: Appeal heard on 20.03.2014 alongwith Stay Application of ONGC. Conditional stay
granted subject to deposition of Rs. 25,000/- before 27.03.2014. Next date awaited.
79. ONGC owned vehicle allotted met with an accident on 28.02.2013 in Mumbai wherein
plaintiff was badly injured and was admitted to Guru Nanak Hospital for treatment. He was
given treatment for 4 months. Hospital sent bill to ONGC for payment. ONGC has taken vehicle
insurance policy from National Insurance Company so issue for settlement of bill was forwarded
to them. Insurance Company informed(Insured company is not liable for compensation, only
Insurance Company is) to Plaintiff. But plaintiff already filed case No. 992/2013 before Motor
Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT).
ONGC Stand:
Insurance Company’s liable to pay compensation to plaintiff.
Status: Matter is in the stage of evidence. Plaintiff filed his affidavit of evidence, Matter kept on
05.02.2019 for ONGC to file its evidence.

80. Suit No.309/2014 filed by ONGC against defendants. Court granted Exparte Order against
Defendants restraining/stopping Defendants, their members/supporters from entering into 100
metres area around the office of ONGC, Panvel, to stop their demonstration, morcha, unlawful
assembly and acts. Inspite of Order, defendants continued to agitate before Office, violating the
Order. Contempt Petition (Misc. App.) 19/2014 was filed. Interim order in favour of ONGC.

Status: Matter in the stage of framing Issues. Matter last listed for hearing on 20.12.2018;
adjourned, next date 07.03.2019.

81. Suit No. 309/2014 filed by ONGC against Defendants. Court granted Exparte Order against
Defendants restraining them from conducting any unlawful assembly and in any manner
obstructing the Plaintiffs employees from ingress and egress. Inspite of exparte Order,
Defendants continued to agitate before Office premises, Panvel, violating the Order.
ONGC filed Contempt Petition (Misc. App.) 19/2014 on 24.11.2014.

Status: Matter is in the stage of argument. Matter last listed for hearing on 04.01.2019, adjourned
the matter. Next date awaited.

82. Petitioner has filed Writ Petition, challenging order dated 28.01.2015 passed by Defendant 1
whereby Scheduled Tribe caste certificate issued to her has been cancelled and confiscated. The
Petitioner prays direction restraining ONGC by an order of injunction from relying upon and/or
giving effect to the impugned judgment and order dated 28.1.2015 passed by Def.1.Stay has
been granted to petitioner.
Status: Last listed on 17.12.2018, adjourned to 26.03.2019.
83.The petitioner alleged he has educational qualifications. Petitioner appeared for an entrance
examination of ONGC which has 24 posts- 14-unreserved, 6-OBC, 2-SC, 2-ST with roll no.
2022301332. Respondent 2 published list of 22 candidates shown as selected. Petitioner filed
RTI, 2005 raising specific contentions about result of examination. Respondent 2 replied
"Information is confidential as recruitment exercise vide advertisement No.2/2017 is still under
process. Petitioner filed Writ, praying respondents be directed to correct selection list and
consequently appoint petitioner for post of Jr. Roustabout.
On 11.01.2019, oral order passed for copies to be supplied within 2 weeks from 11.01.2019 ,
failing which matters shall stand dismissed. Matter listed for hearing on 24.01.2019; didn't reach.
Next date awaited.

84. ONGC filed petition challenging the majority award under s.34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 dated 30.04.2016 where ONGC was directed to pay Rs.34,42,388.17/-
and Rs.10,00,000/- as majority award and arbitration cost respectively. Arbitrator upheld claims
of ONGC, directed defendant to pay ONGC the actual sot of arbitration Rs.37,00,000/- approx.
An appeal was prepared for challenging the majority award dated 30.04.2016 received on
29.06.2016.

Status: Pending at admission stage. Stay was granted subject to deposit of Rs.40 Lakhs by
ONGC in the Court., which was deposited. Last heard on 23.01.2019. Court adjourned matter to
07.02.2019.

85. ONGC filed petition challenging the majority award under s.34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 dated 30.04.2016 where ONGC was directed to pay Rs.34,42,388.17/-
and Rs.10,00,000/- as majority award and arbitration cost respectively. Arbitrator upheld claims
of ONGC, directed defendant to pay ONGC the actual sot of arbitration Rs.37,00,000/- approx.
An appeal was prepared for challenging the majority award dated 30.04.2016 received on
29.06.2016.

Status: Pending at admission stage. Stay was granted subject to deposit of Rs.40 Lakhs by
ONGC in the Court., which was deposited. Last heard on 23.01.2019. Court adjourned matter to
07.02.2019.
34-50
34.Fire occurred on 26.07.2008 at Nhava Supply Base, raising the issue of non-registration Nhava Supply
Base as 'Factory' under Factories Act, 1948. Complaint was filed against C&MD, ONGC stating that
activities done in premises are covered under definition of ‘Manufacturing Activities’ as per Section 2(k)
of Factories Act, 1948. Therefore ONGC had to register the establishment as ‘Factory’.

Court passed an Order dated 23.10.2008 to issue process against C&MD, ONGC. ONGC challenged said
Order stating it violates the provision of Section 198 of CrPC.

Status: Matter appeared on 30.8.10 for exemption of accused which was rejected. ONGC has filed CRA
89 / 2010, dismissed vide order dt 04.06.2011. ONGC appealed by Petition No. 1709 of 2011, pending.
Last appeared on 31.10.2011. Next date awaited.

35.Fire occurred on 26.07.2008 at Nhava Supply Base, raising the issue of non-registration Nhava Supply
Base as 'Factory' under Factories Act, 1948. Complaint was filed against C&MD, ONGC stating that
activities done in premises are covered under definition of ‘Manufacturing Activities’ as per Section 2(k)
of Factories Act, 1948. Therefore ONGC had to register the establishment as ‘Factory’.

Court passed an Order dated 23.10.2008 to issue process against C&MD, ONGC. ONGC challenged said
Order stating it violates the provision of Section 197 of CrPC available to Public Servants.

Status: Matter heard on 24.6.11; proceedings against C&MD in case No. 525/08 granted stay.

36. Respondent filed an application during 1994 before the Commissioner for Workmen's
Compensation, Mumbai claiming compensation of Rs. 80,664/- on the ground that she contracted
occupational disease while working in ONGC. Judgement in favour of Respondent dated 16.6.2006,
directed to pay compensation with interest @ 6% from date of issue of Disability Certificate(23/7/94) till
realization. ONGC deposited amount of Rs. 1,39,114/- with Commissioner, filing Appeal No. 2031/2006
challenging said Order. Court granted liberty to Respondent to withdraw Rs. 70,000/- against personal
undertaking, remaining amount can be withdrawn against two Sureties.

Status: 1st appeal against Order- 18.8.2006. The matter is yet to appear on the board.

37. The matter pertains to Contract No. MRBC/EBG/ MAT/ IMP/GP/ S/ Upgrade/04/99/EB/2021 dated
18.6.01 for up gradation of MV Sagar Sandhani, deduction of certain amount payable to defendant led
to dispute, which was referred to Arbitration. Arbitral Tribunal vide award dated 4/2/2005 awarded US $
2,936,607.82 with 8% interest from 20.8.03 till date of award and future interest @ 6% on principal sum
till payment to Contractor.

ONGC challenged the said award before HC, which was dismissed on 12/12/200.
ONGC filed Appeal which was also dismissed. ONGC filed SLP before SC. ONGC deposited an amount of
Rs. 11,95,71,911/- equivalent to US $ 2,936,607.82 in H.C. along with Rs. 3,75,000/- (Reading charges to
Arbitrators) on direction of Court while admitting SLP. SC decided the SLP vide Judgment dated
4.09.2014, allowing claim of 56 days in favour of ONGC. Judgement stated ONGC is entitled for getting
refund of amount equivalent to 56 days, defendant is entitled for getting amount of 86 days from HC.

ONGC filed chamber summon to get appropriate orders for releasing the amount and interest. The
same will come up for hearing in due course of time. Next date awaited.

38. Dispute regards the contract No. MR/WOB/MM/SC/3D-Vessel/ 20/08/ P965L08003/EB-2147 dated
24.11.2008 which was entered into for hiring of seismic vessel for Seismic Data Acquisition and
processing for three field seasons from 2008-2009 until 2010. Defendant claims despite performance,
ONGC hasn't paid them.
On the Contrary and in the alternative to the Claim of USD 31,068,968, Defedant has claimed damages
suffered by it due to the vessel remaining on the standby for 52.755 days. Conciliation was done but
Contractor didn't accept therefore, arbitration started.
Status: Arbitrator pronounced award of USD 14,527,282.69 on 24.07.2017. The application under
Section 34 was filed on 26.10.2017.
Next date awaited.
39. Dispute regards the contract No. MR/WOB/MM/SC/3D-Vessel/ 20/08/ P965L08003/EB-2149 dated
15.01.2009 (hiring of seismic vessel for Seismic Data Acquisition and processing for field season 2009-
2010). Defendant claims despite performance, ONGC hasn't paid them.
.
Defendent claims compensation for all losses and damage including additional financing charges due to
non-payment by ONGC.
In the matters (Contract Nos. 2147, 2149 & 2159) of CGG, conciliation was done recommending that
ONGC should pay US$ 12,825,968 out of total claim of USD 33.258 Million, but wasn't acceptable by
defendant; Arbitration started.
Status: Arbitrator pronounced the award of USD 6,665,743.66 on 24.07.2017. Application under S.34
was filed on 26.10.2017. Next date awaited for hearing.

40. Dispute regards the contract No. MR/WOB/MM/SC/3D-Vessel/ 20/08/ P96DL10002/EB-

2159/9010013852 dated 09.12.2010 (for hiring of seismic vessel for Seismic Data Acquisition and
processing for field season 2010-2011). Defendant claims despite performance, ONGC hasn't paid them.

The Claimant contests levy of Minimum guaranteed Work Penalty for an amount of USD 16.417 Million
for field season 2009-10 later reduced to 5.29 Million.

In Contract Nos. 2147, 2149 & 2159, conciliation recommending that ONGC should pay US$ 12,825,968
to Defendant out of total claim of USD 33.258 Million, which wasn't accepted by Contractor; arbitration
started.

Status: Arbitrator pronounced the award of USD 8,778,740.21 on 24.07.2017. The application under
Section 34 was filed on 26.10.2017. Next date awaited.

48. This matter relates to Contract No. MR/WOB/ MM/Q-Vessel SC/50/ 2006/ EB-2132 dated
13.07.2007 between ONGC and WGIL, the Contractor. The contract is for the long term leasing of one
Q-Marine vessel for the field season 2007-08, two Q - Marine Vessel for the field season 2008-09 and
one Q- Marine Vessel for field season 2009-10 in Indian Offshore for getting executed 3D Seismic data
and acquisition and processing using Q-Marine technology as per contractual provisions. The Claimants
allege that in spite of performing all the services as per contractual specifications to ONGC's full
satisfaction, ONGC has wrongly withheld payment of various invoices towards lease charges during
demobilization of vessel Western Spirit and Geco Topaz, erroneous application of Fishing Coefficient,
fuel escalation, etc. amounting to USD 3,574,299/-. The Contractor's allege that inspite of their
repeated requests, ONGC did not agree to disburse the amount, and therefore WGIL invoked
arbitration.

Arbitral Tribunal constituted. WGIL filed their statement of claim on 16/10/12 on account of (i)non-
payment of demobilization charges, (ii) Mobilization charges (iii) fishing Coefficient (iv) fuel escalation
charges amounting to USD 3,574,299/-. ONGC filed its reply on 29/12/12 denying allegations of
contractor, and bringing out correct facts of the case.

ONGC's stand: Full and final payment has already been made by ONGC which had been accepted by
Claimant. As per contract provisions, after receipt of invoices, ONGC was to make payment for
undisputed amounts only which was paid and thus has not withheld any amount wrongly. ONGC took
into consideration all associated parameters in restricting the demobilization period to 3 days and the
reasons given by the claimant for delay in demobilization beyond 3 days are not acceptable. The
amounts have been deducted as the claimant (WGIL) has been found lacking in professional
competence and efficiency in consistently making choices which reflect otherwise like opting for a
longer route and purchase of expensive fuel when cheaper option was available. Also Clause 14.8 has
been wrongly interpreted by WGIL, it does not make time of essence in making payment, it is only a
'best endeavor' clause.

WGIL's stand: WGIL contended that, due to adverse weather conditions the rate of data recovery slow
down which took time for demobilization of vessels. Weather conditions also created unsafe condition
for employees on vessels. The time taken for demobilization was beyond the control of contractor and
was purely attributable to unforeseen adverse weather conditions. Therefore contractor is entitled to
the rentals of extended time. ONGC deducted huge amounts from rentals during additional period of
mobilization unilaterally and arbitrarily. ONGC considered fishing related risk coefficient, only that
portion of survey area where depth was below 75 meters instead of area of operations as defined in the
contract. Under the contract, ONGC has option to supply fuel to contractor, failing which contractor was
free to arrange fuel from third party; cost difference shall be reimbursed to contractor. Since ONGC
failed to supply fuel, contractor arranged at its own. ONGC disputed reimbursement on the basis of
erroneous application of the methodology. The award has been pronounced on 02.05.2017. As per the
Award,
1. The claim as lodged by the Claimant is partly allowed.
(i) The Respondent to pay the Claimant a sum of US $ 1,331,349,00.
(ii) The Respondent to pay a Claimant sum of US $ 141,488,00.
(iii) The Respondent to pay Claimant a sum of US $ 539,921.00.
2. Rest of the claim is dismissed.
3. Thus the Respondent to pay the Claimant a total sum of US $ 2,012,758.00 within a period of three
months from date of the award., failing which the Respondent shall pay to the claimant interest on the
awarded amount at the rate of 12 % p.a. from the date of the award till the date of realization.
It has been challenged and admission is awaited.

Status: Arbitral Tribunal consisting of

Mr. V.K. Gupta (WGIL), Former Chief Justice of High Court of Uttarakhand
New Delhi, Justice M.S. Rane (Retd.) (ONGC) and Justice VJ Palshikar (Retd.) (Presiding Arbitrator)
pronounced the award on 02.05.2017. As per the Award,
1. The claim as lodged by the Claimant is partly allowed.
(i) The Respondent to pay the Claimant a sum of US $ 1,331,349,00.
(ii) The Respondent to pay a Claimant sum of US $ 141,488,00.
(iii) The Respondent to pay Claimant a sum of US $ 539,921.00.
2. Rest of the claim is dismissed.
3. Thus the Respondent to pay the Claimant a total sum of US $ 2,012,758.00 within a period of three
months from date of the award, failing which the Respondent shall pay to the claimant interest on the
awarded amount at the rate of 12 % p.a. from the date of the award till the date of realization.

The matter was on board on 8th December, 2017. The Petition has been admitted subject to the
Petitioner depositing the amount Awarded to the Respondent by the Arbitral Tribunal within 8 weeks
from 08.12.2017 in the office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master.

Further in the event the Respondent is desirous of withdrawing the said amount, then the Respondent
shall furnish a Bank Guarantee of a Nationalized Bank of the said amount with the Prothonotary and Sr.
master. The details of the above shall be mentioned in the Order.

Pursuant to the directions passed by His Hon’ble Justice Mr. M.S. Sanklecha vide order dated 08.12.2017
and 21.12.2017; an amount of Rs. 13,96,53,698 has been deposited with the Prothonotary and Senior
Master High of Bombay High Court.

89. 1. CIDCO granted licence of lease of the land admeasuring 474,120 sq. mtrs. situated at Village
Kalundre and Bhingare, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad, Navi Mumbai to ONGC vide agreement dated
14.11.1985.
2. ONGC vide letter dated 14.02.2012 gave the status of Phase I and II of the land allotted by CIDCO and
also for the land at Kalundre. ONGC vide the said letter dated 14.02.2012 informed CIDCO that it is
extending help to the weaker section of the society under Corporate Social Responsibility Scheme and is
planning a full-fledged multi-speciality 300 beds hospital with the facilities of coastal paramedics and
nurses. Further it has also planned to construct paramedics and nurses training centre in the said piece
of land, as Panvel Taluka is not having any modern hospital facilities and hence construction of such type
of multi-speciality hospital shall render great help to the nearby villages by way of specialised medical
services and shall generate employment to the locals. ONGC also planned to develop the model stores
on this plot of land and was also contemplating a national level sports complex on the said land, as such
facilities are not available in Navi Mumbai and enclosed a master plan in this regard as and by way of
submission for CIDCO’s consideration and approval.
3. ONGC vide letter dated 27.3.2017 requested CIDCO to participate in the Amnesty Scheme for
payment of service charges to 100% waiver of delayed payment charges and express readiness to make
the immediate payment of service charges. CIDCO vide letter dated 29.3.2017 informed ONGC to make
a payment of Rs.47,93,88,536/- towards service charges payable for various 12 plots allotted to the
ONGC in Navi Mumbai as on March 2017 under Amnesty Scheme. CIDCO vide letter dated 28.4.2017
once again informed ONGC to make the said payment of Rs.47,93,88,536/- towards outstanding service
charges for the various 12 plots allotted to the ONGCs in Navi Mumbai as on March 2017 under the
Amnesty Scheme. CIDCO however mentioned that the above scheme is applicable for the nodes falling
under Panvel Municipal Jurisdiction only and revoked the payment letter dated 29.3.2017 and informed
that the detailed statement as requested with the revised payment of letter of outstanding service
charges along with the applicable delayed payment charges is ready.
4. CIDCO again by their letter dated 6.7.2017 informed the ONGCs that the delayed payment charges for
three plots falling under Panvel Municipal Corporation is waived off up to March 2017 under the
Amnesty Scheme, the payment is to be made by the demand draft / pay order.
5. Thereafter CIDCO vide letter dated 7.7.2017 informed ONGC that as the matter of service charges in
respect of the plot in Phase III in Kalundre was kept on hold by CIDCO due to the administrative reasons
ONGC was requested to make revised payment of Rs.71,46,93,830/- towards service charges up to
March 2017.
6. ONGC vide letters dated 4.8.2017 & 21.8.2017 drew the attention of CIDCO to the meeting held on
6.7.2017 between the CIDCO and the ONGC Officials wherein issues pertaining to the ONGC lands as
well as issue of service charges being 100% waiver under Amnesty Scheme for 12 plots of ONGC were
discussed. The Managing Director of the CIDCO confirmed that Amnesty Scheme is applicable only for
the plots falling under newly constituted PMC and therefore 100% can be extended only to the three
plots of ONGC at Kalundre, Panvel, and ONGC has agreed to pay service charges of all the plots at Panvel
as intimated by CIDCO.
7. CIDCO vide letter dated 6.9.2017 informed that during the meeting held on 12.2.2015 ONGC had
requested for the permission of storage of heavy materials for E and P activities and for the purpose of
other than the residential use on land at Phase III at Kalundre which was rejected by CIDCO on the
ground that the said zone is under the residential zone. In addition to the above, recently during the
meeting held on 6.7.2017 at CIDCO Bhavan, where the officers of both the sides were present, CIDCO
informed ONGC about the resumption of the said land as it is not developed till date and not needed by
ONGC for the residential purpose. Considering the above facts and circumstances, CIDCO decided to
terminate the Agreement to Lease and the Agreement to Lease executed on 14.11.1985 stood
terminated and licence to enter upon the said lands was revoked and requested ONGC to hand over
vacant and peaceful possession of the same to CIDCO within one month of the receipt of the said letter.
8. CIDCO by their letter dated 7.9.2017 and in continuation of the above referred letters informed ONGC
that service charges for the said plot of land at Kalundre, Panvel, admeasuring 47.41 hectares up to
March 2017 works out to Rs.8,01,18,392/- and requested ONGC to make the payment of the service
charges at the earliest.
9. ONGC vide their letter dated 26.9.2017 informed CIDCO that in view of the requirement of the land
for the various projects of ONGC as explained in the meeting dated 6.7.2017 and in subsequent letters
requested CIDCO to withdraw letter dated 6.9.2017 and cancel the termination of Agreement to Lease
and revocation of licence of plots in Phase III, at Kalundre, Navi Mumbai, in order to enable ONGC to pay
the payment of service charges under the Amnesty Scheme. ONGC again vide letter dated 27.9.2017
requested the Chairman and Managing Director of CIDCO for an appointment and meeting to discuss
the issue of termination of Agreement to Lease and revocation of licence of plot in Phase III, Kalundre,
and payment of service charges under the Amnesty Scheme.
10. CIDCO vide letter dated 6.10.2017 informed the ONGC that in exercise of powers under Regulation 9
of Chapter III of Navi Mumbai Disposal of Lands (amendment Regulation), 2008, CIDCO hereby cancels
the allotment of the plots admeasuring 47.41 hectares of Phase III in Kalundre, Panvel, Navi Mumbai,
allotted to ONGC for residential purpose and called upon ONGC to remain present or depute authorised
officials on Wednesday on 11.10.2017 at 11.00 a.m. to hand over the peaceful possession of the said
plot, failing which the CIDCO will constrained to resume the land in their absence without further
notice.

ONGC filed the instant writ petition and prayed before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court to quash aside
the notice of termination of lease dated 15.11.1985 vide letter dated 06.09.2017 and 06.10.2017 and
CIDCO may be ordered not to act upon for taking possession of aforementioned land on 11.10.2017.
Status:
Matter was last heared on 04.01.2019. Hon’ble Court adjourned the matter to 11.01.2019 in order to
enable the advocates for CIDCO LTD. to take instructions from CIDCO whether to refer the matters to
administrative mechanisms for resolution of CPSEs inters disputes. Matter was last heared on
11.01.2019 but due to paucity of time adjourned to 12.02.2019.