JAGADAMBA COKE MFG ENTERPRISES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of the judgment passed by the learned trial Judge on Feb. 28, 1985 disposing of the five writ petitions concerning C.R. Nos. 14809(W) to 140812 (W) of 1983 and C.O. No. 19444(W) of 1984. Against the said judgment disposing of the writ petitions by the learned trial Judge, Shree Jagadamba Coke Manufacturing Enterprises, Sree Shyam Industries, Bajarangbali Coal Co. Ltd., Tentulia Coke Plant. G.N. Coke Manufacturing Co. Private Limited and Premium Fuels preferred appeal and such appeals have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by this judgment because in all these appeals a common question of law and fact is involved.

(2.) It appears that Premium Fuels did not move any writ petition but they made application for being added as parties in the pending writ petition and it appears that Premium Fuels were allowed to intervene in the pending writ proceedings and make submission.

(3.) It appears that there are about 100 coke oven plants operating in Bihar and West Bengal out of which only one coke oven plant viz. Premium Fuels is situated in West Bengal and the rest are in Bihar. For manufacturing hard coke, these coke oven plants require coking coal and such coking coal is supplied by the Bharat Coking Coal Limited (B.C.C.L.) which own the collieries containing coking coal in the area. B.C.C.L. and other subsidiaries of Coal India Limited (hereinafter referred to as CIL) distribute diverse quantities of coal every month from various collieries to these coke oven plants. The entire coal supplied to these oven plants come from CIL and/or its subsidiaries. The quality and/or grade of coal varies from colliery to colliery. It is an admitted position that the total quantity of suitable quality or grades of coal for manufacturing hard coke by the coke oven plants in question is not sufficient to meet the requirements of the said coke oven plants. Because of the scarcity of the availability of the suitable coking coal to meet the demands of all the coke oven plants, disputes and differences arose in the matter of supply of such coal to the different coke oven plants in Bihar and West Bengal. It appears that being dissatisfied with the policy and/ or orders and/or directions passed by the CIL and BCCL to supply different grades of coal to the said coke oven plants, some of the said coke oven plants had moved writ petitions before this Court, inter alia, alleging that they had been discriminated against in the matter of supply of suitable grade of coal to such coke oven plants and direction and/or policy decision of CIL and/or BCCL had caused serious prejudice to them. It also appears that on such writ petitions interim orders had been passed by this Court from time to time and the court of Appeal had also passed interlocutory orders in connection with such writ proceedings. It also appears that some of the coke oven plants had entered into an agreement with the CIL, or BCCL for supply of specified grades of coal of specified amount and in the writ petitions some of the writ petitioners contended that because of such agreements made by CIL or BCCL with some of the coke oven plants and in view of the policy decision made by CIL or BCCL to supply different grades of coal from different collieries to the said coke oven plants, some of the coke oven plants had been suffering serious prejudice. Accordingly, in the writ petitions, such agreements entered into between the BCCL and CIL with other coke oven plants and/or the decision taken by the BCCL or CIL to supply different grades of coal from different collieries to the coke oven plants in question were sought to be challenged on the ground that the said arrangements had resulted in hostile discrimination and such agreements and/for directions were unjust, unfair and arbitrary. It may be noted that collieries of CIL and BCCL are all nationalised collieries.