IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11769 of 2008 M/S RANCHI LIME WORKS Versus COAL INDIA LIMITED & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arbind Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. V.M.K. Sinha, Advocate ----------------- 03 08.09.2008 The petitioner was granted linkage, as per the guidelines of Ministry of Coal to Coal India Limited and was allotted Bharat Coking Coal Limited, as its source. The linkage was given pursuant to physical inspection to unit. In spite of linkage, the petitioner was not being supplied coal. It approached the Jharkhand High Court, which directed the respondents to make supplies , as per linkage. The writ application was allowed. Being aggrieved by the same the respondents went to the Apex Court, without success their SLP was dismissed being obliged to supply coal from January 2005. Coal supplies were started. In the mean time, in the year 2004, Bharat Coking Coal Limited-respondent issued general directions to all persons, who were attached for its supply of coal, pursuant to said linkages to submit documents with regard to verification of their establishment. This was naturally not responded by the petitioner, because till then the petitioner had not been supplied with even one Kg of coal and the matter was still being litigated by the respondents. Subsequently, by letter dated 6/8th of June 2007, petitioner was asked to submit the documents in the attested, authenticated or notarized. Petitioner immediately protested that it had received supply prior to January 2005, then, what was the relevance of the documents - 2 - for the earlier year i.e. 2002-03 etc. Realizing the mistake on 15th of June 2007, respondents reverted to the petitioner asking him to submit documents for the years subsequent to 2004 by 30th i.e. within 15 days in respect of 13 points query. Petitioner had to take time to collect and colaid the documents and sent it to the respondents, which was required by the respondents on 24th of July and accordingly being beyond time was rejected. In the mean time, coal supplies were suspended. In my view, the actions of the respondents clearly smacks of arbitrariness and unfairness. Several similar matters have been disposed of today itself in respect of the same respondents and similar actions and in each on fact, it is found that the respondents have acted arbitrarily and unfairly, in the matter. Here also first they insisted that the petitioner should submit documents from the year 2002-03 and realizing their mistake changed their stand, but not their date of submission. Merely, because the documents were received late, which was before inadequacy of time, they were rejected. This is, how a State instrumentality enjoying monopolistic power took behest when dealing with rights of individuals, especially, which is their life line. In such circumstances, I have no option but to direct respondents to examine and reverify the matter within two months from production of documents along with a copy of the order of this Court, in accordance with law. This disposes of the writ application. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J.)