JUDGEMENT 1. Petitioners in this application were the petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 10653/2007 which was disposed of by judgment dated 10.1.2008 by this Court. This Court held that the decision to stop supply of coal to the petitioners was void ab initio and as a consequence the respondent-Coal Company was directed to resume the supply of coal forthiwth to the petitioners. 2. It was not in controversy that against that order, the Coal Company went in L.P. A. No. 174/2008 which was disposed of on 24.4.2008 whereby the direction of this Court to resume supply of coal forthwith was modified and made subject to enquiry to be done by the Coal Company. By the said order the respondent-Coal Company was directed to take a decision in this matter within two months and liberty was given to them to resume or not the supply of coal, in the meantime. 3. The writ petitioners being aggrieved by this order approached the Apex Court by preferring Civil Appeal No. 375/2009 which was then disposed of by the Apex Court on 22.1.2009. The Apex Court modified the order of the L.P.A. Bench by providing that in course of the enquiry if the Coal Company is unable to produce a particular document, they would be given liberty to explain and make out its deficiency. The Apex Court granted two months time to the respondent-Coal Company to complete enquiries. 4. On behalf of the petitioners, it is submitted that the first order in the series of appeals was passed on 10.1.2008. We are now in July, 2009, almost one hand half years later. Several two months have gone by. The respondents are still to conclude the enquiry. They have yet to inform the petitioners whether the documents supplied by them are adequate or not. Because of the non-supply of coal which is a sloe raw material for the petitioners, the units are lying closed. Even though almost six months have gone by since the order of the Apex Court, nothing has been communicated to the petitioners, no inspection made and still malafidely the coal supplies are withheld. 5. On behalf of the respondent-Coal Company it is submitted that considering a large number of cases it has not been possible for the officers of the Coal Company to scrutinize their records even in one and half years. 5. On behalf of the respondent-Coal Company it is submitted that considering a large number of cases it has not been possible for the officers of the Coal Company to scrutinize their records even in one and half years. Petitioners rightly, in my view, submitted that the respondents are delaying the matter obliviously and indifferently to the loss that is being caused to the petitioners. 6. Having perused the order-sheets, in my view, if the respondents-Coal Company was truly acting in bona fidely, then they ought to have move an application before the Apex Court for extension of time as fixed by their Lordships. But still they have not chosen to do so. 7. In my view, the complaint of the petitioners may be genuine and correct, but this Court is of the opinion that violation, if any, as alleged would be that of the orders of the Apex Court and the petitioners remedy lies there. This Court cannot proceed against the respondents-Coal Company for violation of the orders of the Apex Court. 8. Petitioners are given liberty to move the Apex Court, if they so like. 9. In view of the orders passed today, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners Sri Giri does not press I.A. No. 3592/2009. 10. With this observation, this application is disposed of.