Back
2011 (6) Supreme 194
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma and Anil R. Dave, JJ.
Eastern Coalfields Ltd. — Appellant(s)
versus
M/s Tetulia Coke Plant(P)Ltd.& Ors. — Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No(s). 6888 of 2011
(Arising from SLP(C) No. 325 of 2011)
Decided on : 10-8-2011
Facts of the Case:
Writ petition was filed by respondents herein in the instant case challenging legality of e-auction scheme introduced by Union of India and adopted by Appellant. High Court following decision of Apex Court in Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. passed orders and certain directions. Respondents were directed to furnish all documents to counsel for coal company showing actual payments made by respective applicants during the period from May, 2005 to December, 2006 and the difference between the amount paid and amount notified by April 30, 2010. Another direction which was passed was that the documents furnished shall be verified by concerned coal companies and in case of any difference, parties to deliberate upon matter so as to enable them to come to an accepted solution. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed.
2. Present Appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.
Findings of the Court :
Contention of Additional Solicitor General that whatever was challenged in the instant petition was only an interim order was held unsustainable. It was not so because respondents had also challenged legality of e-auction scheme in the writ petition. High Court had not disposed of only an interim prayer but had disposed of entire writ petition by its judgment and order . Consequently, held that when the entire scheme was set at naught by Apex Court, whatever action had been taken following said e-auction by coal company had also been declared to be illegal and coal company had become liable to refund the entire money which was collected in excess of the notified price. That was the consequence of quashing of the scheme and the same came to be reiterated by Apex Court while contempt petitions were filed and were disposed Of. Hence, it could not be said that effect of decision of Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd would be restricted only to those cases which were before this Court and not for all cases which were pending in different High Courts at that stage, at least to the issues which are common in nature. Again without taking a plea of unjust enrichment either in the writ petition or before Apex Court, said plea could not be allowed to be argued at time of argument. No reason to take a different view than what was taken by High Court. Appeal was Disposed of.
ORDER
Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4.10.2010 passed by the Calcutta High Court whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal of the Appellant herein and while doing so, affirmed the findings and conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge.
3. A writ petition was filed by the respondents herein before the Calcutta High Court which was registered as Writ Petition No. 1279 of 2005. In the said writ petition the respondents challenged the legality of the e-auction scheme introduced by the Union of India and adopted by the Appellant herein. In the said writ petition, an interim order was also passed on 08.08.2005 with regard to the liability for payment of price for purchasing coals under e-auction scheme and for furnishing bank guarantee in connection thereof.
4. During the pendency of the said writ petition in the High Court, some other writ petitions involving similar issues and also pending before the Calcutta High Court and also other High Courts were transferred to this Court. This Court passed certain interim orders. However, finally the said cases were taken up for final hearing and were disposed of by a judgment and order rendered on 01.12.2006 in the matter of Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in1 (2007) 2 SCC 640. By the said judgment and order this Court upheld the challenge of the writ petitioners therein to the scheme of e-auction. This Court in the said judgment further held that the said scheme of e-auction was invalid. Consequently, this Court declared the same as ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and quashed the said e-auction scheme.
5. Contempt petitions were filed by some of the parties thereto in which several orders came to be passed by this Court whereby this Court directed the coal companies for refunding the excess amount paid by the purchasers who were petitioners before this Court in those cases.
6. The writ petition filed by the respondents, however, was pending consideration before the High Court. After the disposal of the cases involving similar issues which were raised and also disposed of by the aforesaid decision, which is now reported in (2007) 2 SCC 640. The writ petition of the respondents herein also was taken up for consideration and a judgment and order was passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of the said writ petition on 25.03.2010. By the said order the High Court followed the decision of this Court in Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. (supra) and passed orders and certain directions. The respondents were directed to furnish all documents to the counsel for coal company showing actual payments made by the respective applicants during the period from May, 2005 to December, 2006 and the difference between the amount paid and the amount notified by April 30, 2010. Another direction which was passed was that the documents furnished shall be verified by the concerned coal companies and in case of any difference, the parties to deliberate upon the matter so as to enable them to come to an accepted solution.
7. The legality of the aforesaid judgment and order came to be challenged by filing an appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court which was dismissed, as stated hereinbefore. Still aggrieved, the Appellants have filed the present appeal on which we have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
8. Mr. P.P. Malhotra, learned Additional Solicitor General has submitted before us that the respondents herein were not parties when the matter was heard by this Court nor were they parties when the interim orders were passed by this Court and, therefore, the respondents cannot get the benefit which arises out of the interim orders passed and the final orders passed by this Court in the case of Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. (supra). It is submitted that as their writ petition was a separate writ petition, the same will ha
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
