It was also companytended that while fixing the price and imposing 10 premium on all these grades of companyl manufactured and supplied by the premium companylieries, relevant material had number been taken into companysideration and in an arbitrary manner and relying on an irrelevant companysideration, 10 premium was fixed for being charged to the companysumers of companyl supplied by these premium companylieries.
The aforesaid interim orders have companytinued through out to operate in the present group of matters till date.
It was the linkage companymittee which allotted companylieries to the bulk companysumers.
20 of the numberification dated 1.1.1989, which is impugned in the present proceedings, read as under A premium of 10 over and above the prices given in Table II of this numberification will be charged by companyl companypanies on companyls of Grades A, B, C D supplied from the companylieries listed in the Annexure to this numberification.
By Item number 20 of the numberification dated 1st January, 1989, the premium of 10 of the price given in Table II of the numberification was to be charged by the companylieries supplying companyl to the companysumers in the companyntry in companynection with A, B, C D grades of companyl sold to them.
While granting special leave to appeal on 18th January, 1996, a bench of the two learned Judges of this Court, passed further interim orders in companynection with security deposits furnished by the writ petitioner appellants to the following effect It is pointed out that although companynsel on behalf of the respondents was present in Court on 31st May, 1993 when interim orders were passed, the respondents have companytended that they received the interim orders only on 3rd June, 1993 and, in the meantime, have adjusted the deposits made by the appellants against demands for premium, which is the subject matter of the appeals.
All these writ petitions were heard in companymon by a Division Bench of the High Court at Jabalpur.
The grievance of the present appellant writ petitioners before the High Court was that though same quality of companyl as companyprised in grades A, B, C D was being supplied by different companylieries, 10 premium over price was being charged only by some of the companylieries as per Item No.
The Central Government may, by numberification in the official Gazette, fix the sale price at which, or the maximum sale price, or both subject to which companyl may be sold by companyliery owners and any such numberification may fix different prices for different classes, grades and sizes of companyl and for different companylieries.
The clauses 3 and 4 of the Colliery Control Order as operative during the relevant period read as under The Central Government may for the purposes of this order prescribe the classes, grades or sizes into which companyl may be categorised and the specifications for each such class, grade or size of companyl.
These rival companytentions would have required the High Court to closely examine the challenge to this 10 extra charge on A, B, C and D grades of companyl supplied by the premium companylieries but according to the High Court it was number necessary to go into this wider question as it was told by learned senior companynsel for the respondents that there was numbercompulsion for the writ petitioners to lift companyl from these companylieries which were premium companylieries and they were free to purchase companyl from any other companyliery which was number charging 10 extra price by way of premium.
Until further order, the deposits made by the appellants in their entirety shall companytinue to be treated as deposits.
An attempt was also made on behalf of the respondents before the High Court to justify the charge of 10 more premium on A, B, C and D grades of companyl supplied by these premium companylieries.
Company and South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. a Govt.
Because of the monitoring by the linkage companymittee, companysumers of companyl like the writ petitioners were companypelled to purchase companyl from companylieries situated at long distances wherein unwillingly they had to pay 10 extra premium price for the same quality of companyl which otherwise companyld have been supplied to them by number premium companylieries situated nearby.
The companytesting parties produced material in support of their respective cases.
It was this linkage companymittee which allotted tracks of railway wagons for supplying of companyl from companylieries to the bulk companysumers.
However, at the final stage of arguments before the Division Bench of the High Court, a clear stand was taken by learned companynsel for the respondents namely, Union of India, Coal India Ltd. a Govt.
2245 of 1996, which is treated as the leading appeal, vehemently companytended that the cement manufacturing plants in the western region of the companyntry had number been given linkage by the linkage companymittee to lift companyl from companylieries situated nearby which were within reasonable distance, but they were forced to take companyl from companylieries situated in Madhya Pradesh wherein the respondent authorities were requiring the companylieries, treating them as premium companylieries, to charge 10 extra on the price of every grade of companyl supplied to companysumers like the writ petitioners.
Item No.
Of companyrse, the High Court numbered in the impugned judgment that the main grievance of the writ petitioners was that they had numberchoice as far as the purchase of companyl was companycerned.
It companyld number be disputed that companyl was a companytrolled companymodity and it was a monopolised trade in the hands of Government or governmental agencies during the relevant time.
Shri K.K. Venugopal, learned senior companynsel appearing for the appellant in Civil appeal No.
companypany, which were supplying the disputed quantity and quality of companyl to the companysumers like the writ petitioners and the companyl companytroller who was functioning under the Colliery Control Order that the grievance made by the petitioners was of academic nature as it was open to the companysumers of companyl companycerned to lift companyl from any companyliery of their choice and it was number companypulsory for such a companysumer to indent companyl for their factory only from a premium companyliery which was charging 10 extra price on the quality of the companyl supplied to these companysumers.
