is.on B»c r i^ IOQ^ BEFORE THE HN'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fC.) N0. \\\^ 72010 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ,€ zi^ ^y'7 ^'J//./ <''«<0' .^•'' ' <•" .-.2?' ^%y Y .6"" o.1" ^SF^ -6° Phil Coal Benefication Pvt Ltd, B- 10, Sai Plaza, Opp - CMD College, Link Road, Bilaspur, thro.ugh - Its /l. /I. 3. •*n VERSUS Coal India Limited, 10 Netaji Subhash Chand Road, Kolkata, through - Its Chairman. South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through - the Chairman - Cum - Managing Director, Regd. Office, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (CG) Chief General Manager (Sales) and Marketing Deptt Q/C) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Regd. Office Seepat Road, Bilaspur (CG) Chief Sales Manager (Sales and Marketing Department) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Regd. Office - Seepat Road, Bilaspur M/s M Junction Services Limited, through - Its Head Coal Junction, TATA Center, 43, Jawaharlal Nehru Road/Kolkata - 700 071. WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTINO OF INDIA <•4. / 5. ^s'" Hlt^CSS^^QR^yMiCtWt^ia^WKffl^ WnftRetiiBn^^iNo.-lll'tofZOlO PETITtONER : fhil Svstems Versuis '. ':. . • • ;' RESPONDENTS : GoatUndia t.imited and others. WritPetitiofttCtNo. 11-120f 2010 PETITIONER : Phii Cpal Beneficatiori Pvt. Ltd. .VefSHS'' :• ':- ' . ';'. ^,: ;. ;• RESPONDENTS : Coallridiai-irnjteci&othersi. PETittOI^ER WrifcPetitiont^^o.1»!33bf2010 : Phit MineraiS Beneficatiort & Energy Pvt '^:L^.''^ ..;:,..,•:.'^.^ yetsus 1.^..': :;-.:.' 1':: /.:.""•'': . RESPONDENTS : GoallndiaLimited&others. WritPetitionK(GaNio.»13(of^OtO PETITtONER ^&rsus RESRONi^N^r?: <^^^3^ Wriil:!e'titioriE(@l1MQ.1115of2011? RETITIONER : &lndermani©oalGQ. ';;?:.::°?'kM&rsus,.'•.;•: .::... RESPONlaBiJTS : ^aQaiKRelia i-imiteci^ othere. w^ PETITfONER :Jain(SoalServices' .'Wersus l.;:'.:^ .,.', RESPONDENTS : CoalWialrCTted^^^^^^ i$ ai' :":^^ iitl ::tHU ^" ?i Wrif Petition (Ct N0.1121 of 2010 PETITIONER : Goal Trade Versus RESPONDENTS : Coal Ihdia l.imited & otters. Writ Petition (C1 No."1122 of 2010 PETItlONER : DimpteOverseas Versus RESPONDENTS Coal India Limited & others. WraT PETITiONS UN®B URTt©LE226/227 OR THE GQNST1TUTION OF fNDIA iDiviSion Bench: Hon'bleShril.M.Quddusi& Hon'ble Shri N.K. Aaarwal. JJ. Present: Shri Amit Jogi with Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsel Torthe ; ;petitioner(s),- \ .....:. ',." . . . ,, .: - Dr. N.K. Shukla, Sehior Advocate with Shri Shailendra Shukla, coynsel for respohdenteNo.1 to 4. "?• ORALORDER (Passed or!9uldayofJUly,2010) Per I.M.Quddusi.J. Atlthewritpetitronsi.e.W.f3.(C)Nos.1111/2010, 1112/2010, 1113/2010, 1114/2010, 4115/2010, 1116/2010; 1121/2010 & 1122/2010are beingheardandclisposedpfbythiscommonorder, as the questioris of law ihvolved iri altthe petitipns aie Qne and fhe same. 2. The petitioners are traders ih the fleid of coai; They purchase and sell the coal. ?S6ytli Eastem Coai Fields Limited invited E- .auctioning on 4th March, 20t6. The petifioners participated in the auction but later on the E-Auction was caneelled pn the gpoynd that there waslessernumber<sfparticipants. 3. At this stage, the petitiQnereapproachedttiisGourt. HoweVer, nointerim order has been grantect ahd ultimatelyithe re-auctionwas « ^^ made^ontine^n 2Q Maroh, 2010. 'TheVVT^ 2010 was fte^95,97^p6r MetrieTonne (MT) but on re-e- au^ the WTGavei^epnceon;MtnMa^ andthys,accoryingtoJeamedcounselappearingfortfierespondents, the S.E.C.L. got best buyer and also best price. There was gain of Rs.1 OOO/- oer Metric Tonne to the S.E.C.L. and the auction was finalized. At this stage, nothing cah be done by this Court as the auctiQn has already been finalized and the qyantity of coat so auctioned has been sold, Leamed epunsel fpr the petitioner(s) have raisedtheciuestionthatthesameshouldhothavebeensotd.: 4. Dr. N.K. &hukta, learned cbunsel for the respondents?SEGL;has informed this Court that three bjdders namely Phil MineraJs Benefication & Energy Pvt. Ltd. in writ petition (C) No.1113/2010, Sagar Traders in WritPetition(C) No. 1114/2010aiid DimpleOverseas in Writ Pgtition (C) N0.1122/2Q10, proprietors ofthe petitionerfinns, alsoparticipatedinthere-e-auctionproceedingsbuttheycouldnotgat success. • ., : ; , : :. : ' ;-' ' 5. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioriers has madelhis submissions with regard to ehallehging the policies contehtic^ l^ed on the decjsions of Hori'bleApex G^ Smok'e/ess Coaf/nc^ (P; tM anrfo ers V^ otters; reported in <20Wj 2 SCC 640 and Afeentf Oeiwtopmenf Authonty Vs. A^oci^on tff Mahsigement Studies and another, (2009) 6 SCC 171. nTHough we may observe that r^ in hand i&beyond the seQpe ofjudieial rsview buttheApexeourt in ths caseofAshoka(supra);liasJnter-aliaobserve(i tiiat^'E-auctiOn is nota modetofixprice.ltis$nlyaffl6detool^inmaximympnce.jn^^^e^ words, deriving the optirnutn taeriefit 1}y safe of ceal iis the goaf. While doing so the State dc^s nbt Ha\re tafollow the pnnC^)les af fKation of price. It is not requiretf to applyiMs mind as to its elfect. It treals coal like any other commodity. It ti^ts itSelf like a private^^t^ |A distinction must be bdfhe in roind^when a State intends to part witH a privilege or largesse asi& ccmp^tor jn tto expectectto fulfitit5GonStitutiQnsi;^oajensHrinedyncterArticle39(t^(of theCoristitution". " ;^ • '"'::';1: ••.>::^.'.'-'^;:i:.1:':' ::- .:-:' : :1;1. ." 311 11 VS^E" >^ 4 6. Since the auction has already been finaljzed ahd the quantity of coal in questipn has been sold, these writ petitions haye become infructupusatthisstage.Therefore.thesewritpetitjonSaredismissed astiavingbecomeinfructuoys.Nocosts. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge ICw Sd/- N.K. Agrawjl Judge