EVEREST COAL CO PVT LTD Vs. COAL CONTROLLER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants filed in this Court applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, for declaration that Bihar Trade Article (Licenses Unification)Order, 1984 and Bihar Essential Commodities (price and display) Order, 1977 has no application to the business carried on by them and that the said Bihar Trade Article (Licenses Unification) Order 1984 was ultra vires and illegal. They also prayed for Writ of Mandamus commanding the State of Bihar and the Central Government to forthwith desist from applying and enforcing the provisions of the said Bihar Trade article (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 and Bihar Essential Commodities (Price and Display) Order, 1977 and for commanding the Coal controller to direct the State and the Central Government not to enforce the provisions of the said two Orders. On 13th February, 1984, Padma Khastgir, J. exparte vacated adinterim orders and also dismissed the writ applications. Being aggrieved, there by, the appellants have preferred the instant appeals under clause 15 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) THE learned trial judge did not dismiss the writ application for default but had recorded her findings on merits of the writ application. Presumbly, through inadvertence the learned trial judge had recorded that the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Railways was aggrieved because of the non service of the writ petitions or the copies of the interim' orders passed and that the interim orders have been obtained by suppression of material facts. None of the Railway Administrations were made respondents no interim orders have been made against them in the writ petition and, therefore there could be no occasion for service upon them of the writ petitions or interim orders. With respect, the learned trial judge was also not correct in observing that the writ petitioner were in respect of an Act which had already been repealed. The learned advocates for both parties have submitted before us that neither the Bihar trade Article. (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 nor the Bihar essential Commodities (Price and Display) Order, 1977 which have been impugned in the writ applications have been repealed and they still remain in force. Therefore, the writ applications could not have been dismissed on the ground that they had become infructuous.

(3.) A remand of the case to the trial court would have resulted in further delay; therefore, we heard on merits the writ petition. The respondents have submitted that no cause of action wholly or in part, arises within the territories in relation to which this High Court exercises its' jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the appellants cannot maintain in this court the writ petition challenging the vires of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification)Order, 1984 and the Bihar Essential Commodities (Price and Display)Order, 1977 -and their enforcement. we are Of the view that at the stage the said question of maintainability ought to be determined.