Judgment :- 1. The prayer in the writ petition reads as follows: “For the reasons contained in the accompanying affidavit, it is respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to call for the records in C. No. 217/1/42/81 on the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras-600034, the first respondent abovenamed and quash the order passed therein dated 25.2.1982 and consequently direct the Income-tax Officer, Circle I(8), Madras-600034 to grant interest under S. 214 on a sum of Rs. 2,32,778/-” 2. The petitioner in this writ petition is United India Insurance Company Ltd., which is a Government of India Public Sector undertaking. The first respondent is Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu - I, Nungambakkam High Road, Madras-34 and the second respondent in the writ petition is the Income-tax Officer, Company Circle I(8), Madras 34. Admittedly, the dispute involved in this writ petition is between a Government of India Public Sector Undertaking and the Union of India. The Supreme Court, in Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise (1992) 61 E.L.T. 3 = 1991 J.T. (4) 159 (S.C.) J.T. has held as follows:— “We direct that the Government of India shall set up a committee consisting representatives from the Ministry of Industry, the Bureau of Public Enterprises and the Ministry of Law, to monitor disputes between Ministry and Ministry of Government of India, Ministry and Public Sector Undertaking of the Government of India, and Public Sector Undertakings in between themselves, to ensure that no litigation comes to Court or to Tribunal without the matter having been first examined by the Committee and its clearance for litigation. Government may include a representative of the Ministry concerned in a specific case and one from the Ministry of Finance in the Committee. Senior Officers only should be nominated so that the Committee would function with status, control and discipline. It shall be the obligation of every court and every Tribunal where such a dispute is raised hereafter to demand a clearance from the Committee in case it has not been so pleaded and in the absence of the clearance, the proceeding s would not be proceeded with” 3. It shall be the obligation of every court and every Tribunal where such a dispute is raised hereafter to demand a clearance from the Committee in case it has not been so pleaded and in the absence of the clearance, the proceeding s would not be proceeded with” 3. Subsequently, the Apex Court in Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise (1994) 116 CTR Reports, 643) while dealing with matters pending before High Court or Tribunal has observed as follows: “It is also clarified that even the pending matters before any Court or Tribunal should also be the subject-matter of the deliberations of the High Power Committee. All the matters pending, as on today be referred by the appellant or the Petitioner, as the case may be, to the High Power Committee. The High Power Committee will deal with these matters most expeditiously and endeavor to resolve the matters”. 4. Following the above rulings of the Supreme Court, instead of disposing of this writ petition on merits, the parties are directed to refer the matter to arbitration by the High Power Committee referred to above and settle the disputes in the light of the direction given by the Apex Court referred to supra. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.