Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1363 (JHR)

Kohinoor Steel Private Limited v. Union of India

2013-12-17

N.N.TIWARI

body2013
Order : I.A. No. 5003 of 2013 Heard the parties. 2. By order dated 27.02.2013 this Court has granted four weeks' time to the respondent-CCL, as prayed for by them, for filing detailed affidavit. In the meantime, the respondent-CCL was directed to continue to make supply of fuel as per the terms and conditions of fuel supply agreement to the petitioner's unit. 3. Against the said order, the respondent nos. 3 and 4 preferred an appeal being LPA No.107 of 2013. The said appeal was dismissed by order dated 30.07.2013. 4. The said respondents, thereafter, preferred SLP (Civil) CC 18135 of 2013 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 5. The said SLP, after hearing the parties, is disposed of by order dated 01.11.2013 asking this Court to hear the parties on the question of interim relief in this writ petition and pass final order. This is how, the matter is placed before this Court. 6. It is relevant to mention here that the said respondents, in the meanwhile, filed I.A. No.5003/2013 praying therein for modification of the order dated 27.02.2013. It has been stated, inter alia, that subsequent to the said order dated 27.02.2013, the respondent came to know that Mednirai Coal Block has been allocated to the petitioner for their use. In view of the said allotment, the petitioner is not entitled to get supply of coal in accordance with the terms of the earlier agreement, and a fresh agreement is required to be entered into by the parties. 7. It has been further submitted that as per the guideline/policy of the Ministry of Coal dated 26.02.2010, the petitioner is entitled for “Tapering Linkage” which is a short term linkage provided to the coal consumers, who have been allocated captive coal block for meeting coal requirements of its linked End Use Plant (EUP) in the cases where the development/production of coal block allocated for this particular EUP is not synchronized with the operation/requirement of coal of the EUP. From the date of allocation till normative date of commencement of the Block, the tapering linkage may be provided to the extent of 100% of the requirement for power and in other cases 75% of the requirement till the normative date of commencement of production and coal is to be supplied after the normative date of production as follows :- (i) First year – 75% of normative quantity, (ii) Second year - 50% of normative quantity, (iii) Third year -25% of normative quantity. 8. The allocatee of the Block, desirous of seeking tapering linkage for their End Use Plant, has to apply for tapering linkage through Ministry of Coal giving specific reason for seeking tapering linkage and to synchronize EUP and block development. Such request shall, thereafter, be considered keeping in view the recommendation of the nodal ministry. Though the coal block has been allocated to the petitioner, he has not applied for tapering linkage. 9. It has been submitted that in view of the specific provision for tapering linkage after allocation of coal block, the petitioner is not entitled to get coal in accordance with the fuel supply agreement and the petitioner is not entitled for the interim relief. The interim order dated 27.02.2013 is fit to be recalled. 10. The application has been opposed by the petitioner by filing rejoinder. It has been, inter alia, stated that the order dated 27.02.2013 was passed in presence of the parties and there is no change in the facts situation. The said interim order has been tested up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same has not been vacated. 11. However, in spite of the said order, the respondents have not supplied fuel and have defied the order. Due to failure of the respondents to resume supply of coal, the petitioner -industry has virtually shut down and approximately 2000 workmen and employees have been facing situation which may lead to loss of their employment and livelihood. The petitioner company, however, has so far managed to bear the burden of monthly wage bill of workmen and employees to the tune of Rs. 1.20 Crore and also of the maintenance of the factory, electricity, interest and other charges amounting to approximately Rs. 2.60 Crore per month. The petitioner is also being put to loss @ Rs. 12.67 lac per day i.e. Rs. 3.80 Crore per month. 1.20 Crore and also of the maintenance of the factory, electricity, interest and other charges amounting to approximately Rs. 2.60 Crore per month. The petitioner is also being put to loss @ Rs. 12.67 lac per day i.e. Rs. 3.80 Crore per month. The petitioner has been holding the -4agreement for supply of coal, but the respondents have stopped supply on the ground of allocation of Mednirai Coal Block. The said coal block was allocated to the petitioner subject to grant of no objection by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, but the Ministry refused to grant clearance. After rejection of the reference by the said ministry, the petitioner is not able to exploit / use coal from Mednirai Coal Block. There is, thus, no occasion for entering into agreement of tapering linkage. 12. It has been further submitted that the said stand of the respondents is contrary to the letter of the Ministry of Coal dated 28th May, 2009. Clause-2(iv) of the said letter specifically provides that the coal produced from the allocated block shall not replace any linkage. In view of the rejection of the reference by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, the allocation of the coal block has not been given effect to till date and for the petitioner-company the situation, under which the coal linkage was granted, is not changed. 13. It appears from the record that after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances, this Court had passed the said interim order dated 27.02.2013 directing the respondents-CCL to continue supply of fuel as per the fuel supply agreement. 14. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4, as also learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the Union of India, repeated the same grounds which were taken in the application. However, the respondents have not been able to convince that there is any change in the facts situation from the date when the interim order was passed. 15. It is true that Mednirai Coal Block was said to be allocated to the petitioner – company, but the same was subject to clearance of the Forest and Environment Ministry, Government of India. The clearance has been refused by the said ministry. The petitioner, thus, has not been able to exploit the mine or use the coal block so far. 16. The clearance has been refused by the said ministry. The petitioner, thus, has not been able to exploit the mine or use the coal block so far. 16. The purpose of allocation of the said Coal Block to the petitioner was to provide them captive coal mine for their use and for mining and exploiting coal but the company has not been able to mine coal for the reason of rejection of terms of reference by the Ministry of Environment and Forest. In view thereof, the allocation of Mednirai coal block has not changed any situation. The purpose of allocation of the coal block has not been served so far. There is, thus, no occasion for the petitioner for entering into the tapering linkage agreement. It has been admitted by the respondents that the fuel supply agreements entered into between the parties are still subsisting. 17. I, therefore, find no ground for repudiating the earlier fuel supply agreements and stopping fuel supply to the petitioner – company. 18. There is no ground for recalling the order dated 27.02.2013. The prayer of the respondent nos. 3 and 4 for recalling the said order is, thus, rejected and the interim order dated 27.02.2013 is made absolute. I.A. No. 5003 of 2013 stands disposed of.