IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.786 of 2009 1. THE CENTRAL COALFILEDS LTD., through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Darbhanga House, Ranchi 2. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi 3. The Chief General Manager( Sales and Marketing),Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi 4. The General Manager ( Sales and Marketing),Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi 5. The Sales Manager, Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi … … Respondents Appellants Versus M/S BABUL SMOKLESS FUEL (P)LTD, a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its factory at Industrial Area, Pandaul, Madhubani, through its Managing Director Awadhesh Kumar Chaudhary, son of Shri Krishnakant Chaudhary, resident of Mohalla Balbhadrapur, P.S. Laheriasarai, District- Darbhanga … … Petitioner respondent ----------- 8. 2.2.2011 This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of the order dated 27.4.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. 10611 of 2006 filed by the respondent herein. The main grievance of the respondent- petitioner in the writ petition was that the appellants herein were discriminating between the writ petitioner and the members of Special Smokeless Fuel Manufactures Association( hereinafter referred to as SSF Association) whose members were similarly situated in the matter of allotment of coal in terms of the agreement entered into between the parties. The counter affidavits having been filed on behalf of the respondents- appellants, the matter had been heard by the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge had allowed the writ petition 2 holding as follows: “ In that view of the matter, I am left with no option but to hold that the judgment inter-party that is as between the petitioner and the respondents in the case in C.W.J.C. No. 8951 of 2000, which was disposed of on 02.01.2001, would continue and to apply and bind the parties. The said judgment has not been either modified or deviated from in any further litigation as between the parties. Petitioner would be entitled to receive the same treatment that is being given by the respondents to the members of Special Smokeless Manufactures Association, there being no valid reason to depart from there. I order accordingly. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ application is allowed.” Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the respondents- appellants. During the course of arguments, this Court had an occasion of having seen the agreement between the parties which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to this Letters Patent Appeal ( Annexure R-12 to the writ petition) filed by the respondents- appellants. Clauses 18.4 and 18.5 of the said agreement read as under “ 18.4 Governing Law: This Agreement, and the rights and obligations hereunder shall be interpreted, construed and governed by the laws of India. The court of Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all matters under this Agreement. 18.5. Entirety: This Agreement together with any documents referred to in it, supersedes any and all oral and written agreements, drafts, undertakings, representations, warranties and understandings heretofore made relating o the subject matter hereof and constitutes the entire Agreement and understanding of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof. It is 3 expressly agreed that this Agreement shall supersede all previous discussions and meetings held and correspondence exchanged between the Seller & the Purchaser in respect of this Agreement and any decisions arrived at therein in the past and before coming into force of this Agreement shall have no relevance with reference to this Agreement and no reference of such discussions or meetings or past correspondence shall be entertained either by the Seller or the Purchaser for interpreting this Agreement or its implementation.” A perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge goes to show that neither the Agreement nor any of the clauses of the Agreement has been referred to in it when the Agreement is dated 30.4.2008 which has been entered into between the parties. As per clause 18.4 of the Agreement „the court of Jharkhand at Ranchi shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all matters.‟ A perusal of clause 18.5 goes to show that it was expressly agreed that this Agreement shall supersede all previous discussions and meetings held and correspondence exchanged between the seller and the purchaser in respect of this Agreement and any decision arrived at before coming into force of this Agreement shall have no relevance with reference to this Agreement and no reference of such discussions or meetings or past correspondence shall be entertained either by the seller or the purchaser for interpreting this Agreement or its implementation. Relying upon the Agreement the respondent writ petitioner was seeking supply of coal with reference to the period prior to coming into force of this Agreement. Clause 18.5 thereof says that all the agreements shall stand superseded with 4 reference to the jurisdiction of this Court as the court of Jharkhand at Ranchi has exclusive jurisdiction in all matters under this Agreement. As the writ petition was filed by the respondent- petitioner before this Court, which is the subject matter of the writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, we are of the opinion that the order of the learned Single Judge has to be set aside. It is, accordingly, set aside. However, we allow the respondent- writ petitioner the liberty to approach the appropriate Forum for the relief sought for in the writ petition, in accordance with law and this Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of only to the extent indicated above, without entering into its merit. Kanth ( T. Meena Kumari, J.) ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)