In a critisize to judicial overreach in dispute resolution, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that mediation cannot be imposed on an unwilling party, setting aside the Calcutta High Court’s order that referred a land allotment dispute to mediation. The apex court emphasized that once a writ of mandamus has been issued and upheld, courts must ensure compliance rather than diverting the matter for negotiation.
The ruling comes in the case of Rupa and Co. Limited & Another v. Firhad Hakim & Others (C.A. Nos. 5517-5519 of 2024), where the Supreme Court directed the West Bengal government to honor its commitment to transfer a 30-cottah plot to Rupa and Co. Limited as per the original allotment terms from 2011.
Background of the Case
The dispute dates back to 2011 when West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (HIDCO) offered to transfer a commercial plot in Jyoti Basu Nagar (New Town, Kolkata) to Rupa and Co. Limited on a freehold basis for ₹4.00 crore. However, in 2012, HIDCO unilaterally changed the terms, offering only a 99-year lease, citing concerns related to the Model Code of Conduct imposed during the state elections. The company challenged this decision, leading to prolonged legal battles.
Legal Journey: High Court to Supreme Court
High Court Verdict (2020): The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Rupa and Co. Limited, declaring HIDCO’s actions arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It issued a writ of mandamus directing the execution of the sale deed as originally promised.
Supreme Court Refusal to Intervene (2021): HIDCO appealed before the Supreme Court, but its special leave petition was dismissed, affirming the High Court’s ruling.
State Government’s Defiance: Instead of complying, HIDCO demanded the company pay the revised market price of ₹12.51 crore—more than three times the original amount—sparking contempt proceedings before the High Court.
Mediation Order (2024): Despite previously stressing compliance, the Calcutta High Court referred the matter to mediation on February 9, 2024, despite objections from Rupa and Co. Limited.
Supreme Court Strikes Down Mediation (2025): On appeal, the Supreme Court quashed the High Court’s mediation order, terming it legally untenable.
Supreme Court’s Key Observations
Delivering the judgment, Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih strongly criticized the High Court’s decision to refer the matter to mediation when the state government was already in contempt of court orders.
On Mediation: “Mediation cannot be thrust upon an unwilling party, especially when a clear judicial order exists. A writ of mandamus must be enforced, not diluted.”
On Government’s Defiance: The Court condemned HIDCO’s attempt to demand an inflated price as “an aggravated contempt and an attempt to defeat the mandamus of the High Court.”
On Judicial Authority: “The majesty of law requires that due obedience must be given to judicial commands, particularly when not interfered with by this Court.”
Final Directions by the Supreme Court
State Must Comply: The Supreme Court directed the Chief Secretary of West Bengal to execute the sale deed in compliance with the High Court’s 2020 order.
Personal Appearance if Non-Compliance: If the government fails to comply, the Chief Secretary must personally appear before the Supreme Court on March 3, 2025, to explain why contempt action should not be taken.
