2022 Supreme(Del) 1191
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Yashwant Varma, J.
Esl Steel Limited & Anr. - Appellantss
Versus
Union Of India & Anr. - Respondents
W.P. (C) 10860/2022, CM Appl. 31607/2022
Decided On : 01-08-2022
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Mr. Avnish Mathews, Ms. Shruti Arora & Mr. Ivo D'costa, Advs, for the Petitioners; Mr. Apoorv Kurup, CGSC, for the Respondents
The determination of the Fixed Amount for coal mines is variable and subject to evaluation and assessment by the Nominated Authority, and the principles of legal certainty in the tendering process were not violated in this case.
Headnote:
Fixed Amount - Determination of Compensation - Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 - Rule 14
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition sought relief regarding the determination of the fixed cost under Rule 14 of the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Rules, 2015 before conducting the 13th tranche of auction under the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 for Block No. 2 at Parbatpur, Jharkhand. The dispute arose from the Fixed Amount payable by the successful bidder, which was notified by the Nominated Authority and disclosed to all intending bidders.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Fixed Amount had been computed based on available information and the assessment made by the competent authority. It held that the successful bidder cannot require the respondents to freeze the Fixed Amount as on the date of allotment and the issuance of a vesting order. The Court also noted that the determination of compensation need not have attained finality on the date when bids are to be submitted by interested parties.
Issues: The issues revolved around the certainty of the Fixed Amount in the tender document, the rights of the prior allottee, and the principles of legal certainty in the tendering process.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that the Fixed Amount need not have attained finality on the date when the coal mine is put up for auction, and the process of determination is variable and subject to evaluation and assessment by the Nominated Authority. It held that the principles of legal certainty were not violated in the present case due to the clear and unambiguous disclosures made in the Notice Inviting Tenders (NIT).
Final Decision: The writ petition failed and was dismissed by the Court.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:
'a. Issue a writ or order in the nature of mandamus to the Respondent No. 2 to determine the fixed cost under Rule 14 of the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Rules, 2015 before conducting the 13th tranche of auction under the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 for Block No. 2 at Parbatpur, Jharkhand;
b. Issue a writ or order in the nature of mandamus to the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to defer the bidding for the 13th auction until a determination of the fixed cost;
c. Ad interim ex parte relief in terms of prayer clause (b);
d. Order as to costs; and'
2. The petition itself has come to be instituted in the backdrop of a process initiated by the Nominated Authority for allotment of the Parbatpur Central Coal Mine. The aforesaid coal mine which was initially allotted to the Steel Authority of India Limited ['SAIL'] has come to be included in a tendering process initiated by the respondents consequent to SAIL having submitted a request for surrender of the coal mine. That request, which was submitted by SAIL, ultimately came to be accepted by the Nominated Authority on 05 December 2019 and a further decision taken to initiate the process of allocation in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 ['the Act'].
3. A Notice Inviting Tenders ['NIT'] was thereafter issued. The petitioner desirous of seeking certain clarifications with respect to the 'Fixed Amount' payable to the prior allottee appears to have addressed a letter to the respondents. Having failed to receive a satisfactory response, the present writ petition has come to be instituted. The last date for submission of bids stands extended upto 03 August 2022 as was noticed by the Court in its order of 19 July 2022. The NIT while setting out the payments required to be made by the successful bidder makes the following provisions:
'On signing the Agreement, the Successful Bidder, within such period as prescribed in Clause 3.8, shall, to the Nominated Authority:
(i) furnish the Performance Security as specified in Clause 7;
(ii) pay a fixed amount for the compensation for land and mine infrastructure; cost borne by the Prior Allottee for the preparation of geological report; cost borne by the Prior Allottee for obtaining all statutory licenses, permits, permissions, approvals, clearances or consents relevant to the mining operations; cost incurred by CMPDIL for preparation of the mine dossier including block boundary and financial valuation along with applicable taxes; (collectively the 'Fixed Amount'). If the Successful Bidder is a Prior Allottee, then, the compensation payable to such Successful Bidder shall be set off or adjusted against the Fixed Amount payable by such Successful Bidder. The Fixed Amount is required to be deposited by the Successful Bidder in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules and as provided in the Agreement. The Fixed Amount payable is based on the available information and the assessment made by the competent authority and will be uploaded as a part of this Tender Document. Any upward revision in the Fixed Amount on a subsequent date by the Government or the Nominated Authority consequent to any process or on the orders of any competent court of law, shall also be payable by the Successful Bidder. Additionally, in case of any downward revision in the Fixed Amount on a subsequent date by the Government or the Nominated Authority, the same would be refunded by the Nominated Authority to the Successful Bidder;
(iii) For Fully Explored Mines, pay an amount equal to INR 92,51,89,290.00 (Indian Rupees Ninety Two Crore Fifty One Lakh Eight Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Ninety) as the first instalment of the Upfront Amount.'
4. The dispute raised in the present writ petition is with respect to the Fixed Amount which is liable to be paid by the successful bidder. The Fixed Amount was notified by the Nominated Author