IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.2547 OF 2008 M/S SIYARAM FUELS, HAJIPUR, VAISHALI, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS FACTORY AT HARIHARPUR, NEAR KELA FARM, HAJIPUR, VAISHALI THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR ROHIT KUMAR SON OF SRI RASENDRA KUMAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF SUKLA COLONY, HINU, RANCHI ……………….. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED, A SUBSIDIARY COMPANY OF COAL INDIA LTD., KOYALA BHAWAN, DHANBAD THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE COAL INDIA LTD., COAL BHAWAN, 10 NEETAJI SUBHASH ROAD, KOLKATA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN ………………………… RESPONDENTS ******** 11 04.12.2008 Learned Counsel for the respondents Bharat Cooking Coal Limited states and it is not disputed by the petitioner that the coal supply to the petitioner has been resumed. This writ application is now taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself with the consent of the parties. The petitioner was required to submit certain documents for verification of its establishment. Petitioner had a linkage granted to it for supply of coal by the Central Government through Bharat Coking Coal Limited. The coal were to be received from Bharat Coking Coal Limited, a subsidiary of Coal India Limited and for the purposes of verifying directions were issued in the year 2004, to submit papers with regard to 19 points of query. The papers were to be covered by an affidavit in that regard. Petitioner submitted his papers, thereafter, - 2 - by letter dated 6/8th of June, 2007, petitioner was informed that he had to submit the papers duly attested, authenticated or notarized, which he had failed to do. He was required to submit all the papers, accordingly, again, so as to reach the Company by 30th of June, 2007. Petitioner, accordingly, by speed post sent all the letters on 26th of June, 2007, but they were returned, as having being received late i.e. on 2nd of July, 2007 and consequently petitioner supplies have been suspended for want of verification. Petitioner’s plea to accept the documents have not ended any return. On behalf of the respondents, Sri R. B. Mahto, learned Senior Counsel appears and submits that as the documents were received beyond the time indicated i.e. on 2nd of July, 2007, in stead of 30th of June, 2007, they were rightly rejected and such steps cannot be objected. I have considered the matter and heard the parties and in my view, the stand is completely arbitrary and out of order. It must be remembered that Bharat Coking Coal Limited is a subsidiary to Coal India Limited. Both of which enjoys monopolistic power in relation to supply of one of the most industrial raw material i.e. coal. It being a State instrumentality required to act in accordance with Article 14 of the Constitution i.e. in conformity with principles of fairness and - 3 - reasonableness. Regrettably, the facts noted above demonstrate total lack of fairness or reasonableness rather smacks of arbitrariness. The processes of submission of papers were started in 2004. It did not contain any requirement to submit authenticated or self-attested or notarized documents. All that was required was that the documents being covered by an affidavit in the format prescribed that was done. Now, after three years, when the points for consideration were reduced from 19 to 13, suddenly. It is pointed out as if the petitioner’s application were deficient by not complying with any requirement earlier stated, this was wrong on the face of it. As there was no earlier communication to submit documents with self-attestation, authentication or notarization. Secondly, the documents were to be submitted by 30th of June. They were sent well within the time by speed post i.e. 4 days prior, but were delivered by the postal authorities on 2nd of July. It was not a matter of judicial hearing or an examination, where they could not be accepted after the date. The respondents appeared to have forgotten that they have overriding the rights of a parties and stoppage of coal to mean a death blow to the industry. Yet, they took technical view in the matter and returned the documents and affected the industry, as - 4 - own verification and stop supply. As a matter of fact, 30th of June was a Saturday, 1st of July was Sunday, when no postal delivery should have been affected nor any meeting conducted. Deliveries were affected on Monday the 2nd of July by the postal authorities and were rejected, as noted above. This, in my view, establishes gross unfairness and arbitrariness on part of the respondents in delaying with such serious matter. The repercussions were far to reach for such a casual manner in the matter by the respondents. I have no option, but, to direct the respondents that on submission of the documents again along with a copy of the order of this Court the respondents would be obliged to reconsider the matter within a period of two months from that day and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law and if found necessary for establishing existence of the unit they may visit the unit itself. Needless to mention that till final orders are passed, supplies would continue. With these observations and directions, the writ application is disposed of. Anand (Navaniti Prasad Singh)