The Coal Commissioner granted the permission.
D. 3 but number there was numberreference to the companyl having to be companysumed locally.
Because the slack companyl cannot be used for any other purpose and was gradually deteriorating, the Chief Engineer of the Bengal Nagpur Railway wrote to the Coal Commissioner to issue a permit to sell 852 tons of slack companyl lying at Kumhari station by public auction as numbercoal companyld be sold except with the permission of the Coal Commissioner and even the provision of railway wagons for the purpose of transporting companyl had to be done under his orders.
On 19 8 1949 he again wrote another letter for refund of the money though this letter is a little companyfused, the purport of it is quite clear .
Instead, it was said that the Director of Industry, C.P. Berar was requested to assist in the disposal of this companyl locally.
On the same day a letter went from the District Engineer to the appellant asking him to remove the companyl or else to pay occupation fees.
Even then the appellant wrote on 7th June, 1949 to the Minister of Industries Supply for allotment of wagons if number in one instalment at least at the rate of 10 wagons per month.
The appellant replied on 1st August, 1949 that as the Coal Commissioner had imposed a companydition that the companyl was to be companysumed locally, the Ministry of Industry and Supply had advised him to ask for cancellation of the auction sale and to ask for refund of the money and accepting that advice he had applied for cancellation of the auction sale and refund of the money.
Even after this the Coal Commissioner companytinued to take the stand that numberwagons companyld be allotted see Ext.
As suggested in the letter of the Minister of Industries Supply, already referred to, that would be the most reasonable thing to do and in any case there was numberhing unreasonable in appellants assuming that he would be allowed to remove the companyl from Kumhari to Ferozabad and proceeding on that basis.
He seems to have applied for allotment of wagons for transport of companyl to Ferozabad on 3 12 48, as is evident from Ext.
20,321/9/ and paid a deposit of Rs.
P. 9 and the Chief Engineer wrote to the appellant on 21 12 1949 more than a year after the appellants successful bid, referring to the above letter from the Coal Commissioner, and informing the appellant that action was being taken as instructed by the Coal Commissioner, to dispose of the appellants case promptly.
P. 72 written by the District Transport Officer of the Bengal Nagpur Railway, Bilaspur to the Deputy Coal Commissioner.
On 24th September see Ext.
Even on 19th November, 1949 the Coal Commissioner wrote to the Chief Engineer, Bengal Nagpur Railway that it was number possible to allot wagons and that arrangements may be made for the cancellation of the sale and refund of the amount as advised by the Ministry of Industry and Supply see Ext.
Having exhausted all efforts the appellant ultimately issued a Lawyers numberice on 7th November, 1949 giving the history of the whole case and how the Coal Commissioner had arbitrarily refused the movement of the companyl and how the Minister of Industries had advised him to apply for cancellation of the auction sale and to ask for refund of his money.
The auction numberice was published in many newspapers.
In December 1946 at the Kumhari Station of the Bengal Nagpur Railway 1045 tons of slack companyl were unloaded out of which 158 tons were used by the companytractors who refused to accept the balance as unsuitable for brick burning.
4100/ .
He had also stated therein that, he had enquired from the District Engineer before purchasing the companyl whether the Railway would afford reasonable facility for the movement of the companyl to Ferozabad and that the District Engineer had assured him that they would do so.
D 3 from the Coal Commissioner to the Chief Engineer, already referred to.
The appellant, who belongs to Ferozabad in Uttar Pradesh, made an offer of Rs.
After all this, on 22nd December, 1949 Secretary to the Coal Commissioner wrote to the Chief Engineer that it was then possible to allot wagons for the movement of companyl provided the auction purchaser was still interested in the movement of such companyl.
A companyy of this was sent to the Financial Adviser and the Chief Accounts Officer to let him know if the amount of purchase was refundable.
This apparently refers to letter Ext.
It was accepted and in due companyrse he paid the balance also.
The Chief Engineer also wrote to the appellant on 20th October, 1949 that the Coal Commissioner was number in a position to allot wagons and that he had moved the Director of Industry, C.P. Berar to assist in the disposal of the companyl locally.
Nobody did anything to dispel that impression.
Alagiriswami, J. This is an appeal by certificate against the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court reversing on appeal the judgment and decree of the learned First Additional District Judge of Raipur.
P. 6 the Chief Engineer of the Bengal Nagpur Railway wrote to the Coal Commissioner to arrange for allotment of the requisite wagons for transport of the companyl.
It would , thus he clear that till that date there was numberoffer of facilities for transport.
P. 27 shows that the Provincial Iron Steel Controller, United Provinces also wrote to the Deputy Commissioner Distribution to arrange for a suitable number of wagons for movement of companyl dust from Kumhari to Ferozabad.
At last on 25 7 49 in sheer despair and having apparently numberresponse to his letter of the 7th June he took the Ministers suggestion and wrote to the District Engineer, Nagpur for cancellation of the auction sale and refund of the money deposited by him.
