AMRITSAR BRICK-KILN CO Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a firm carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of bricks. It possesses a valid licence under the Punjab Control of Bricks and Supplies Order, 1972. It appears that acute shortage of coal was felt in the Punjab State because sufficient number of railway wagons for import of coal were not being made available to the importers of coal. The State of Punjab made an arrangement under which they recommended the names of the genuine businessmen, who either sold coal or utilised coal in their business, to the Railway authorities to be allotted certain number of wagons. The actual coal thus imported came to be known as 'sponsored coal'. When the shortage of coal became more acute, the Government of Punjab issued a letter on 29th January, 1973, under which it was ordered that the brick-kiln owners should use at least 25% of their burning capacity of non-sponsored coal/alternative fuels, during the burning season. In this manner, the brick- kiln owners were encouraged to make their own arrangements of carrying coal from the collieries to the State of Punjab.

(2.) According to the allegations made in the petition the petitioner-firm sent a draft of Rs. 10,000/- as advance money to M/s Aggarwal Enterprises, Coal Agents of Jharia, for purchase of coal or alternative fuel. This firm made arrangements for four railway box wagons of coal for the petitioner-firm and sent them the R/Rs. duly endorsed by the consignor in the name of the petitioner-firm. These wagons were despatched on 16th October, 1973, from Durgapur Ovan Plants. By 26th October, 1973, these wagons had not reached Ludhiana Railway Station. On 27th October, 1973, three wagons out for the four, reached Ludhiana, and the petitioner called upon the District Food & Supplies Controller (hereinafter referred to as the 'Controller") to countersign the Railway Receipts, so that he may be able to take delivery of these wagons of coal. The Controller refused to release these three wagons in his favour and told the petitioner that he would allot this coal to some one else of his choice. It is this action of the Controller which has been challenged in this petition. Since no written orders were passed by the Controller, no such orders have been filed with the petition.

(3.) In the return filed on behalf of the Controller, it has been mentioned that the brick-kiln owners were allowed to bring slack coal by road or to use alternative fuel to meet their requirements over and above the stocks of sponsored coal allotted to them. He has admitted that some coal despatched by M/s Durgapur Project was actually received at Ludhiana on 27th October, 1973. He has also averred that after the coming into force of the Punjab Coal Price Control Order, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Order') every person who has received or is likely to receive consignment of coal, is required to give intimation of such consignment to the District Magistrate and be is not entitled to sell this coal to the brick-kiln owner or any other person unless nominated by the District Magistrate and at a price to be fixed by him. The Controller has also admitted that it was not necessary for the petitioner to get the countersignatures on the Railway Receipts. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that a brick-kiln owner does not come within the meaning of the word 'dealer', as defined in Clause 2(c) of the Order, and the directions for sale of coal etc. were only binding on a dealer.