SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Adani Enterprises Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer:
1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 03.08.2024 passed in C.B.C. Case no. 17 of 2024 by the learned Presiding Officer, Coal Bearing Tribunal at Ranchi, where and whereunder, the order to maintain status quo has been granted in favour of the respondent against the petitioner till the disposal of the matter.
Factual Matrix:
2. The brief facts of the case as has been enumerated in the writ petition is required to be referred herein, as under:
M/s Adani Enterprises Ltd. is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Company Act and the respondent was allocated the Gondulpara Coal Block, Jharkhand through auction by the Ministry of Coal.
The Central Government issued an order dated 06.01.2020 and 14.05.2020 as amended to the Nominated Authority for auction of the coal mine for sale of coal. Earlier on 24.06.2009, the petitioner no.1 approved the mine plan which was cancelled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and thereafter, a tender was issued in 2020 inviting prospective bidders for allotment of coal blocks in which respondent Adani Enterprises Ltd. on 28.12.2020 eme
Mohinder Singh v. Harminder Singh
Jogendrasinhji Vijaysinghji v. State of Gujarat
Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar
Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai and Ors.
Radhey Shyam and Anr. Vs. Chhabi Nath and Ors.
Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil
Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd. v. Sukumar Mukherjee
Manmatha Nath Biswas v. Emperor
State of Gujarat v. Vakhatsinghji Vajesinghji Vaghela
Mani Nariman Daruwala v. Phiroz N. Bhatena
Chandavarkar Sita Ratna Rao v. Ashalata S. Guram
Laxmikant Revchand Bhojwani v. Pratapsing Mohansingh Pardeshi (1995) 6 SCC 576
Lonand Grampanchayat v. Ramgiri Gosavi
Jijabai Vithalrao Gajre v. Pathankhan
Ahmedabad Mfg. & Calico Ptg. Co. Ltd. v. Ram Tahel Ramnand (1972) 1 SCC 898
Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra
Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra
The court emphasized the necessity of providing a hearing before passing orders affecting parties' rights, reinforcing the supervisory nature of Article 227 over judicial decisions.
Writ under Article 226 is not maintainable against judicial orders in civil proceedings; supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 remains available for such cases.
Point of Law : One of the fundamental principles in regard to the issuing of a writ of certiorari, is, that the writ can be availed of only to remove or adjudicate on the validity of judicial acts. T....
Unconscionable laches can bar relief in petitions under Article 227; courts will not interfere unless there are grave abuses or derelictions.
[The court established that amendments to pleadings can be allowed even after the commencement of trial under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC, provided the party demonstrates due diligence and the nature ....
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable if the conditions for appeal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are not met, emphasizing the need to adhere....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.