IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4795 of 2009 M/S G.K.COKE INDUSTRIES, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS FACTORY AT & P.O. KUNDA, DISTRICT AURANGABAD, THROUGH ITS PARTNER SMT. GEETA SINGH WIFE OF KAUSHAL KUMAR SINGH RESIDENT OF AT & P.O. KUNDA, P.S. AURANGABAD TOWN DISTRICT AURANGABAD Versus 1. THE COAL INDIA LTD.A CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COMPANY INCORPORATED U/S. 617 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE SITUATED AT 10, NETAJI SUBHAS ROD, KOLKATA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN 2. THE CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD., A SUBSIDIARY OF COAL INDIA LTD., (SALES & MARKETING DEPARTMENT), DARBHANGA HOUSE, RANCHI THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, (SALES & MARKETING) CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD., DARBHANGA HOUSE, RANCHI. 4. CHIEF SALES MANAGER, COAL INDIA LIMITED (MARKETING DIVISION) APEEJAY HUSE, B BLOCK, 6TH FLOOR, 15, PARK STREET, KOLKATA 700016. 5. THE REGIONAL MANAGER (SALES), REGIONAL OFFICE, COAL INDIA LIMITED, BORING ROAD, PATNA. ----------- 5 28/01/2010 The petitioner claims itself to be an unit established for production of soft coke. The Company is duly registered and has all the infrastructures available in terms of the design approved by the Central Fuel Research Institute (CFRI). The unit was established some time in the year 2000. All the required paper formalities are in place but the only hitch coming in the way of the petitioner - 2 - to successfully run the unit is non supply of coal by the respondent Coal India Limited. The petitioner wants a direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to enter into a fuel supply agreement in terms of the new coal distribution policy issued by the Ministry of Coal, Government of India vide letter dated 18.10.2007 which is annexure- 11 to the writ application. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is provision for new consumers to enter into fuel supply agreement on the basis of Letter of Assurance (shortly the LOA) issued by the Ministry of Coal but despite such provision in the new coal distribution policy, the respondents are not honouring the said policy. There has been occasion for the petitioner to come before this Court earlier and seek certain directions. Armed with such order he had approached the respondents but the communication contained in Annexure-14 has come to be issued informing the petitioner that since the modalities for issuance of LOA in respect of non-SLC consumers have not been finalized till date and announced, - 3 - therefore, no LOA can be issued in favour of the petitioner or any agreement be entered for fuel supply. The stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is that the coal is in short supply. The Company has commitments to what is known as the core sector. Only after the obligation of the core sector will be met that other consumers of coal can be accommodated. There have been many a round of litigations at various High Courts which has travelled right up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Based on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. and others Vs. Union of India and others (2007) 2 SCC, 640., the new policy has been put in place. As per the respondents the policy contained in Annexure-11 is only the broad frame work but the other details and nitty-gritty of allocations for non core sector or linked consumers are still to be worked out. This is the categorical stand in the counter affidavit. Steps are being taken to formulate and formalise the guidelines in this regard and the moment it is in place, the petitioner will also get benefit from the said guidelines. It has also been - 4 - urged and pleaded that it is not that the petitioner is being treated in isolation and any discrimination is practiced against him. There are many other consumers who are in existence for many long years and were established much prior to the petitioner coming into existence. They are also waiting patiently in queue. The next round of submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the stand or the statement made by the respondents at the Bar in opposition to the writ application is only to defeat the right of the petitioner and not to honour the new coal distribution policy which has already been formulated by the Ministry of Coal, Government of India. There are no pleadings and materials on record to support the stand of the petitioner in this regard. There is categorical statement made on oath on behalf of the respondents that steps are on for finalization of yard sticks for issuance of LOA in respect of such category of consumers to which the petitioner belongs. Since it is still to be notified, there is no occasion for giving a direction which will accrue to the benefit of the petitioner alone. It - 5 - will be un-called for. If a case for discrimination would have been made out, then there would have been an occasion for this Court to interfere or issue directions to the respondents. As the nitty-gritty of the policy is still to be put in place, no direction need to be issued in favour of the petitioner at this stage. Before parting, this Court, however, would like to record that since the policy in question relates to the month of October, 2007 and we are already in January, 2010, then the Coal Company would be well advised to expedite the finalization of such policy so that consumers like the petitioner do not have to suffer or wait indefinitely for the modality to be put in place. This writ application is otherwise dismissed being devoid of merit. AMIN (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)