IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.175 of 2008 COAL INDIA LIMITED &ORS Versus M/S BANDANA FUEL INDUSTRIES ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto, Senior Advocate Mr. V.M.K. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Arvind Kumar Jha, Advocate ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 19th September, 2008. We heard the senior counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the respondent. 2. By the communication dated 3rd August, 2007, the respondent was informed that the Coal Company (BCCL) was unable to supply raw material to it for the reasons stated therein. Aggrieved thereby, the present respondent (original writ petitioner) approached this court. Two fold contention was raised before the Single Judge, namely – (i) that the three grounds on which the supply of raw material has been stopped, could not be basis of such drastic action and (ii) that before taking action of terminating the supply, the authorities ought to have complied with the principles of natural justice and stoppage of supply could not have been done without hearing the petitioner. 3. The Single Judge, after hearing the parties, held that - 2 - none of the three grounds, based on which, decision was taken to terminate the supply was sustainable in law. The Single Judge also held that principles of natural justice ought to have been followed as has been held in similar matters by this court as well as Ranchi Bench of this court (now Jharkhand High Court). 4. The senior counsel for the appellants principally urged that an opportunity ought to have been given to the appellants to hold an enquiry into breach of linkage conditions by the respondent and then taking fresh decision in the matter after hearing the respondent. 5. The counsel for the respondent (original writ petitioner) would urge that since none of the three grounds which led to the termination of supply order by the appellants, was found to have any basis, question of holding enquiry, now, by the appellants, cannot arise and will not be justified. 6. We, thoughtfully, considered the matter and, in our view, although the ultimate order of the Single Judge quashing the communication dated 3rd August, 2007 (Annexure 10) does not call for any interference but at the same time, the right of the appellants to hold an enquiry into breach of linkage conditions by the respondent and taking decision in the matter could not have been taken away. As a matter of fact, one of the contentions before the Single Judge on behalf of the writ petitioner was that supply could not be stopped without hearing the petitioner. - 3 - 7. We, accordingly, dispose of the appeal by the following order: (i) The order of the Single Judge dated 10th January, 2008 to the extent the communication dated 3rd August, 2007 has been set aside, is maintained; (ii) However, it will be open to the appellants to hold an enquiry into the breach of the linkage conditions by the petitioner (respondent herein), and after hearing the respondent, pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Anil/