IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2162 of 2007 M/S MAA JWALA ENTERPRISES Versus SOUGH EASTERN COALFILDS LTD.& OTHERS ----------- 3 3.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Petitioner claims to be bona fide unit which had coal linkage issued in his favour vide letter dated 3.4.2001. This permitted the petitioner to lift the maximum permissible limit 3455 metric tones of coal from what has been known as SECL Coal Field Limited. Before the E-auction policy was introduced by the respondent Coal India, the petitioner was lifting the allotted quantity of coal based on the linkage granted to him. The reason for not doing so thereafter is said to be fluctuation of coal prices and un-stability in the market due to E-auction policy. Admitted position is that for more than a year the petitioner did not lift any coal from the respondents despite having the privilege of linkage granted to him. E-Auction policy was challenged in SLP (Civil) No. 20471 of 2005 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by one Ashok Smokeless Coal Indian Private Ltd. & others vrs. Union of India & others. The E-Auction policy was declared to be unconstitutional by the apex court and the decision is now reported in (2007) 2 SCC 640. Since E-Auction policy was taken to be the reason why the petitioner did not lift coal he approached the - 2 - respondent with a request for restoration of the linkage. Despite the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the respondents have not obliged the petitioner. The petitioner therefore has filed the present writ application seeking a direction upon the respondents. The stand of the respondents which emerges from the counter affidavit is that as per the terms and conditions of the linkage, mentioned overleaf at clause-3 of the said letter, it categorically states that if no coal is drawn for the consecutive period of one year the linkage would be snapped. This is what has been done with regard to the present petitioner which is the accepted position. The other aspect pointed out is that the new policy has come into effect from October, 2007 after the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the new policy lays down parameter and guidelines under which the coal could be released in favour of various industries, if they fulfill the parameter. The stand is that once the linkage is snapped due to the conduct of the petitioner the Coal India Ltd. has stopped issuing fresh linkage or renewing the linkage. Even otherwise there is no provision as such for release of coal based on such linkage any more as per new policy. With the conduct of the petitioner coupled with the provision and the terms and conditions of the linkage of advice letter and with the change policy, the Court has reservation in not issuing any direction in favour of the petitioner. But if the petitioner is still interested and if the October 2007 policy accrues - 3 - in his favour he has freedom to approach the respondent with the necessary claim and the respondent will be well advised to respond on such request of the petitioner if it finds the same in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy prevalent as of now i.e. 2007. This writ application is dismissed with the liberty aforesaid. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)