BIKASH SHAW Vs. EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though the writ petition was earlier filed with two substantive prayers, the petitioner does not press the prayer No. 1. In prayer No. 2 the petitioner has prayed for direction on the respondents to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner towards lifting of 339 M.T. of iron scrap.

(2.) It has been stated that the petitioner's bid in e-auction for lifting 339 M.T. of iron scrap was accepted by the respondent-Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Entire consideration amount of Rs. 80,95,605/- was deposited in advance. Delivery advice was issued dated 17.7.2008 addressing respondent No. 5 and asking to arrange 179 M.T. of iron scrap under Lot Nos. 7 to 11, 16 to 18, 26, 31 and 32 and 160 M.T. of scrap under Lot Nos. 27 and 28. The petitioner, at the first instance, lifted 68 M.T. of iron scrap. The respondents even in that lifting alleged that the petitioner had stealthily lifted 21 M.T., in excess, a case under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code was also lodged against the petitioner. He was taken in custody. Subsequently, the petitioner was released on bail.

(3.) It has been submitted that the respondent, thereafter, is neither allowing the petitioner to lift the remaining quantity of the iron scrap nor has returned the balance amount deposited by the petitioner in advance.