JUDGMENT : SANJEEV KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act with the aim and object of promoting research and teaching in Solid State Chemistry and Allied Sciences in Jammu and Kashmir. It is claimed that the petitioner-Society is an association of renowned professors, scientists, scholars from various prestigious research institutes of the Country. In the meeting of Executive Committee of the petitioner-association held on 4th December, 2003, Prof. Indu Bhushan Sharma was appointed as Trustee of the petitioner-Society. 2. On 02.11.2005, the petitioner-Society entered into an agreement with respondent No. 1 to establish research Institute known as ISCAS Institute of Solid State and Material Sciences. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the petitioner-Society was provided suitable piece of land for raising construction of building for the Institute subject to the petitioner adhering to its objectives enumerated vividly in the agreement itself. The objectives, inter-alia, include undertaking research and teaching in the solid state and material sciences, organize seminars, symposia, conferences, workshops and other educational, scientific and allied activities. It, thus, seems that respondent No. 1 promoted the Institute established by the petitioner keeping in view its laudable objectives, which would make petitioner-Institute to supplement the objectives of respondent No. 1. 3. Be that as it may, pursuant to the execution of the agreement, ISCAS Institute was established in a building constructed by the petitioner with the concurrence of respondent No. 1. It is submitted that prior to the establishment of the ISCAS Institute by the petitioner, a research project was sanctioned by the Government of India, Ministry of Science and Technology vide Letter No. SP/SI/F-50/88 dated 24th April, 1991 for conducting “Structure, Properties and Preparation of some Perovskite Type Complex Oxides” under the guidance of Dr. Indu Bhushan Sharma, the then Professor in the Department of Chemistry of University of Jammu. 4. In the year 2001, another project entitled “Synthesis, Structure, Electric Transport and Magnetic Properties of Ruddlesden-Popper Type Phases” also came to be sanctioned by the Ministry of Science of Technology, Government of India to be executed under the guidance of Prof. Indu Bhushan Sharma and with a view to execute the project effectively, a sum of Rs. 32,28,200/- was sanctioned for purchase of necessary equipments. Indu Bhushan Sharma and with a view to execute the project effectively, a sum of Rs. 32,28,200/- was sanctioned for purchase of necessary equipments. As is evident from sanction letter dated 30.08.2001 issued by the Ministry of Science and Technology, the project was sanctioned and the funds allotted were subject to the terms and conditions elaborately laid down by the department of Science and Technology, Government of India. As per clause 3, all the assets acquired from the grant was to be the property of Government of India and should not be disposed of, encumbered or utilized for the purposes other than those for which the grant had been sanctioned without prior sanction of the Department. Clause 4 of the terms and conditions provided that at the conclusion/termination of the project, the Government of India will be free to sell or otherwise dispose of the assets acquired by the funds granted by the Government for the project and the Institute would render to the Government necessary facilities to arrange sale of these assets. The Government shall, however, be free to gift the assets to the Institute or transfer them to any other Institute, if it was considered appropriate. 5. At the conclusion of the project and with the establishment of ISCAS Institute by the petitioner, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India acceded to the request of Prof. Indu Bhushan Sharma, who by that time had retired from University of Jammu and had taken over as Trustee of the petitioner-Society and conveyed vide communication bearing No. SR/S1/H-14/2000 dated 3rd September, 2004, Ministry of Science and Technology conveyed its no objection for transfer of the two instruments sanctioned in the DST projects to the ISCAS Institute of the petitioner. The transfer of the two instruments aforesaid to the Institute of the petitioner was subject to concurrence of respondent No. 1. It is submitted that respondent No. 1 considered the matter in the 94th meeting of the University Syndicate held on 08.09.2008 and approved the action taken by the Vice-Chancellor, University of Jammu for transfer the instruments along with accessories to the ISCAS Institute from the Department of Chemistry. This was a time when the two i.e. the Institute established by the petitioner and the University of Jammu, which has facilitated its establishment on its soil, were working in tandem and in an atmosphere of cordiality. This was a time when the two i.e. the Institute established by the petitioner and the University of Jammu, which has facilitated its establishment on its soil, were working in tandem and in an atmosphere of cordiality. Soon dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 erupted with regard to installation of gate in front of ISCAS Institute established by the petitioner. 6. The matter went to arbitration in view of the arbitration clause contained in the agreement. The petitioner claims that it also succeeded in getting an interim order in an application filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. In this atmosphere of confrontation between the petitioner and respondent No. 1, respondent No. 1 allegedly started interfering into the functioning of the petitioner. Two news items that appeared in daily newspaper “Early Times” in its edition dated 4th and 5th March, 2010 gave an apprehension to the petitioner that the respondent No. 1 may take over the Institute established by the petitioner and also instruments transferred by the Ministry of Science and Technology from the department of Chemistry to the petitioner. This apprehension appears to have led the petitioner to file the instant petition seeking, inter-alia, following reliefs:- “(i) Writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents No. 1 and 2 from taking (1) Leybold Closed Cycle Helium Cryostat along with Keithley Electric Transport Measurement System and (2) Rigaku Multiflex X-ray Diffractometer and any other material from the premises of the petitioner situated at Opposite Directorate of Distance Education Jammu University Campus, Jammu and Prohibiting the respondents 1 and 2 from taking over the institute. (ii) Or for any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 7. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed their objections through Mr. W.S. Nargal, Senior Counsel. Apart from taking preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition in view of the nature of the agreement executed between the parties, the averments made in the writ petition have been sought to be met by pleading, inter-alia, that the two instruments i.e. Leybold Closed Cycle Helium Crystat along with Keithley Electric Transport Measurement System and Regaky Multiflex X-ray diffractometer were sanctioned for the projects which were being run by the Department of Chemistry, University of Jammu and, therefore, the property of respondent No. 1. The transfer of these instruments to the Institute of the petitioner to achieve its objective was temporary in nature and these instruments were liable to be reverted, on failure of the petitioner to achieve its objectives enumerated in the agreement dated 2nd November, 2005. Strong reliance has been placed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 02.11.2005 to contend that the petitioner has to conduct its activities subject to the instructions that may be issued and the restrictions that may be imposed by the University. 8. Respondent No. 3-Union of India through Ministry of Science and Technology has filed its separate objections. In the objections filed, respondent No. 3 has taken a very categoric stand that the equipments over which the petitioner and respondent No. 1 are fighting was and continues to be property of Government of India. The equipments were sanction in the Department of Science and Technology funded projects which were to be implemented by the Department of Chemistry, Jammu University under the guidance of Prof. Indu Bhushan Sharma. The instruments were, later on, transferred to ISCAS Institute of the petitioner at Jammu with the concurrence of Jammu University with the expectation that transfer will help the researchers at Jammu University and elsewhere. Respondent No. 3, therefore, has expressed its regret that the object for which the funds were granted and the equipments were purchased is not being achieved and this may constrain respondent No. 3 to take these equipments from Jammu and place it at the dispose of some other Institution. 9. In short, the Government of India has asserted its light on the two equipments, which were first lent to the Jammu University for execution of the two projects and thereafter transferred to the petitioner for carrying out its research activities. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am of the considered view that dispute that has erupted between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 with regard to two instruments mentioned above is totally uncalled for and has stemmed out of misconception of both the parties. 11. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am of the considered view that dispute that has erupted between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 with regard to two instruments mentioned above is totally uncalled for and has stemmed out of misconception of both the parties. 11. From the perusal of the material on record and the stand of respondent No. 3, I have no doubt in my mind that the two instruments, which were provided to the department of Chemistry of University of Jammu for execution of two projects to be executed under the guidance of the then Prof. Indu Bhushan Sharma of Department of Chemistry, was the property of Government of India lent to the University only for a specific purpose. 12. As per the terms and conditions of the grant out of which these two Instruments were purchased, all the assets acquired from the grant were to remain the property of Government of India and the same was not to be disposed of or encumbered or utilized for purpose other than for which the grant had been sanctioned without prior sanction of the Government. Clause (4) specifically provides that on conclusion of the project, Government of India would be free to sell or otherwise dispose of the assets which were the property of the Government. The Government of India also retained its discretion to gift these assets to the Institute i.e. University or transfer them to any other Institute, if it was considered appropriate. The Government of India, acting under these clauses of terms and conditions of the grant and with the concurrence of University of Jammu transferred these assets i.e. two instruments in favour of the petitioner for carrying on the purposes for which the ISCAS Institute had been established. 13. I am not in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner that these instruments were gifted by the Department of Science and Technology and, therefore, have become the property of the Petitioner. From a plain reading of communication dated 03.09.2004 issued by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, it is abundantly clear that Government of India only intended to transfer these instruments to the petitioner that, too with the concurrence of respondent No. 1. 14. From a plain reading of communication dated 03.09.2004 issued by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, it is abundantly clear that Government of India only intended to transfer these instruments to the petitioner that, too with the concurrence of respondent No. 1. 14. Be that as it may, the fact remains that these two instruments are neither the property of the petitioner nor that of respondent No. 1 but is the property of respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 being its owner is free to dispose it of in the manner it likes. Respondent No. 3 shall be well within its right to examine the issue at its own level and, if it finds that the petitioner has failed to achieve the objectives for which these two costly equipments were placed at its disposal, it may pass appropriate orders either reverting those instruments to the Department of Chemistry, University of Jammu or any other Institution, which may be engaged in the research activities relevant to the use of these instruments. 15. The plea of respondent No. 1 that in the face of availability of arbitration clause, this petition is not maintainable is not well merited. The dispute with regard to the transfer of instruments from respondent No. 1 to the petitioner is not subject matter of any of the terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties on 02.11.2005. The dispute between the petitioner and respondent cannot be construed to be a dispute pertaining to the terms and conditions of the agreement nor does it pertain to any right or liability accruing in pursuance or under the agreement. The dispute raised in this petition viz-a-viz the instruments aforementioned is a dispute independent of the agreement and, therefore, not arbitrable. 16. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is disposed of by holding that neither petitioner nor respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are the owner of the instruments aforementioned and, accordingly, respondent No. 3 is directed to examine the issue at its own level. If, respondent No. 3, upon enquiry or otherwise, is of the view that the petitioner has failed to achieve the objective for which these two instruments were placed at its disposal, it shall be free to dispose of these two instruments in the manner it deems appropriate. If, respondent No. 3, upon enquiry or otherwise, is of the view that the petitioner has failed to achieve the objective for which these two instruments were placed at its disposal, it shall be free to dispose of these two instruments in the manner it deems appropriate. These instruments can either be reverted to the Department of Chemistry, University of Jammu for the benefit of research scholars or to any other Institution, which is engaged in such research activities as would require the use of these two instruments. The Union of India shall take a view on the issue within a period of six weeks from the date copy of this judgment is served upon it. Till the appropriate decision in this regard is taken by respondent No. 3, there shall be status quo with regard to the use and possession of these instruments.