JUDGMENT : 1. The writ petitioner no.1 imported coal and manganese. The same was stored in plots of land allocated by the respondent no.1 to the writ petitioner. After partial removal of coal, owing to certain criminal complaints, the respondent no.1 did not allow the writ petitioner no.1 to remove the coal and manganese. This led to the writ petitioners approache this Court for release of the coal and manganese by filing the instant writ petition. 2. Initially, an order was passed in the writ petition on 8th April, 2020, which was challenged by the respondent no.1 in appeal. The respondent no.1, being unsuccessful in the appeal took the matter upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, by an order dated 9th June, 2020, allowed the writ petitioner to remove coal on certain terms by modifying the orders passed by this Court in the writ petition and in appeal therefrom. The relevant portion of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is set out hereunder:- "4. Considering the complex factual assertions by both sides, as an interim arrangement during the pending of the Writ Petitions before the High Court, we deem it appropriate to dispose of these appeals without expressing any final opinion on the merits of the controversy. The order and directions we propose to pass are as follows: (i) The respondent-writ petitioners are allowed to take away the subject coal lying in the Port Trust premises to the extent of 34,928 (in words, thirty four thousand nine hundred twenty eight) MT only, on the following conditions: (a) The respondent-writ petitioners will cause to take away the subject coal in the presence of representatives of local police station and also of the Port Trust, after giving at least twenty four hours advance notice to the concerned authority. (b) The appellant-Port Trust will have liberty to take samples truck-wise or at random, as may be advised, from the stated coal being removed by the respondent-writ petitioners from the site of the Port Trust. (c) The sampling be done in the presence of the representatives of Port Trust, Writ Petitioners and the local police officials. (d) The appellant-Port Trust will be free to send the samples for chemical examination and grading to ascertain whether the same matches with the quality of coal as disclosed by the respondent-writ petitioners in the import documents while importing the same. (d) The appellant-Port Trust will be free to send the samples for chemical examination and grading to ascertain whether the same matches with the quality of coal as disclosed by the respondent-writ petitioners in the import documents while importing the same. (e) The samples will be preserved, sealed and signed by all the representatives. (ii) The writ petitioners shall pay 75% of the aggregate of outstanding Port Trust charges on the given day and in respect of remaining 25%, offer bank guarantee or commensurate amount. This is a pre-condition to be complied by the writ petitioners/respondents before the process of removal of coal, as aforesaid, commences. The bank guarantee so offered shall be kept alive by the writ petitioners during the pendency of the writ petition before the High Court and abide by such directions as may be finally passed by the High Court. (iii) In the event the samples results are found to be mismatch with the disclosed quality of the imported coal, it will be open to the parties to seek appropriate directions from the High Court, as may be advised." 3. The wit petitioners now say that on similar line the manganese lying at the premises of the respondent no.1 and belonging to the petitioner no.1 be allowed to be removed. The petitioners say that the quality of manganese will deteriorate if the same is not released immediately due to the monsoon since it is lying in open. 4. On behalf of the petitioners it is further submitted that after passing of the order dated 9th June, 2020, the petitioners have deposited the amount as directed in the said order both in respect of coal and manganese and the respondent no.1 has received the same without any demur. The writ petitioners referred to page 37 of CAN 3678 of 2020, being a portion of the affidavit filed by the respondent no.1 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Referring to the said affidavit the writ petitioners submit that 3502 MTs of manganese is admittedly lying at the premises of the respondent no.1 on account of petitioner no.1. The manganese can, therefore, be released in the same terms on which coal was allowed to be removed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 9th June, 2020. 5. Mr. The manganese can, therefore, be released in the same terms on which coal was allowed to be removed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 9th June, 2020. 5. Mr. S. N. Mookerjee, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that both coal and manganese have been the subject matter of the instant writ petition. The interim order was passed by this Court only in respect of coal. The appeal preferred by Mr. Mookerjee's client was also, therefore, restricted to coal. The subject matter of challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was also in respect of coal and as such, it should be construed that till up to the Supreme Court, the prayer for release of manganese has been refused and as such, without calling for affidavits no order can be made for release of the manganese. 6. Mr. Mookerjee further submits that the quality of manganese imported by the writ petitioner no.1 has not been disclosed and as such, there will be difficulty in drawing up samples with regard to manganese as specified in the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 9th June, 2020 pertaining to coal. In respect of coal since the specifications were already available the samples could be drawn which is not in case of manganese. This submission is, however, disputed by Mr. Bhattacharya, appearing on behalf of the petitioners. He submits that documents from page 208 onwards annexed to the writ petition provide for the details of the manganese. 7. After hearing the parties and considering the materials on record, I think justice will be sub- served if the petitioners are allowed to withdraw the manganese on the same terms as provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for removal of coal in its order dated 9th June, 2020. It is, however, made clear that the writ petitioners shall within seven days from date, supply the details including all specifications and compositions of manganese imported by the writ petitioners to the respondent no.1 and now lying at the premises of the respondent no.1 amounting to 3502 MTs. Once the particulars are provided the respondent no.1 within a period of three days from the same allow the petitioner no.1 start removing the manganese on the same terms on which the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its order dated 9th June, 2020, allowed the coal to be removed. 8. Once the particulars are provided the respondent no.1 within a period of three days from the same allow the petitioner no.1 start removing the manganese on the same terms on which the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its order dated 9th June, 2020, allowed the coal to be removed. 8. It is made clear that the writ petitioners will have to pay the Port charges till the manganese is removed and the respondent no.1 shall not unnecessarily delay the removal of the manganese by the writ petitioners. 75% of the Port charges that has fallen in arrear after the amount that has already been paid by the writ petitioners in terms of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court shall be paid and the balance 25% shall be secured by way of a bank guarantee in favour of the respondent no.1, which will be kept renewed from time to time on or before the petitioners commence to remove the manganese. If any outstanding is there till the entire quantity of manganese is removed the petitioners shall pay the same before removal of the last lot. 9. The writ petition is kept pending. Affidavit- in-opposition be filed within three weeks from date. Reply, thereto, if any, be filed within a fortnight thereafter. The parties shall be at liberty to pray for early hearing of the matter.