MANOHAR LAL SHARMA Vs. PRINCIPLE SECRETARY
LAWS(SC)-2014-9-86
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on September 24,2014

MANOHAR LAL SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
Principle Secretary Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED VS. EMTA COAL LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-2021-9-63] [REFERRED TO]
DB POWER LTD. VS. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ORS. [LAWS(APTE)-2015-3-11] [REFERRED TO]
KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(SC)-2024-8-59] [REFERRED TO]
M UMAPATHY VS. COMMISSIONER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI RIPON BUILDINGS; ASSISTANT ENGINEER [LAWS(MAD)-2015-6-586] [REFERRED]
GVK POWER (GOINDWAL SAHIB)LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-236] [REFERRED TO]
EMTA COAL LIMITED AND ORS. VS. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2015-12-32] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH M. VS. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (NORTHERN CIRCLE) AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-1-289] [REFERRED TO]
MOHITRAM PATEL S/O JIDHAN PATEL VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2019-11-93] [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED & ANR VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2017-1-121] [REFERRED TO]
M/S ADHUNIK POWER AND NATURAL RESOURCES LIMITED VS. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR [LAWS(JHAR)-2017-4-16] [REFERRED TO]
G. HARI GOVINDA PRASAD AND ORS. VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. [LAWS(APH)-2020-3-56] [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED AND OTHERS VS. ODISHA COAL AND POWER LIMITED [LAWS(ORI)-2017-9-127] [REFERRED TO]
AOSENLA PONGENER VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2023-10-50] [REFERRED TO]
MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2015-3-259] [REFERRED TO]
BLA POWER PVT. LTD. VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2015-10-56] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2019-7-103] [REFERRED TO]
GVK POWER VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-44] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHEELA T.R. VS. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL STATION COLLECTORATE KALPETTA WAYANAD AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-1-288] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)On 25th August, 2014 judgment was delivered in these cases and it was held, inter alia, that the allotment of coal blocks made by the Screening Committee of the Government of India, as also the allotments made through the Government dispensation route are arbitrary and illegal. Since the conclusion arrived at would have potentially had far-reaching consequences, on which submissions were not made when the case was heard, the question of what should be the consequences of the declaration was left open for hearing.
(2.)The relevant paragraphs of the judgment dated 25th August, 2014 read as follows:-
"155. The allocation of coal blocks through Government dispensation route, however laudable the object may be, also is illegal since it is impermissible as per the scheme of the CMN Act. No State Government or public sector undertakings of the State Governments are eligible for mining coal for commercial use. Since allocation of coal is permissible only to those categories under Section 3(3) and (4), the joint venture arrangement with ineligible firms is also impermissible. Equally, there is also no question of any consortium/leader/association in allocation. Only an undertaking satisfying the eligibility criteria referred to in Section 3(3) of the CMN Act, viz., which has a unit engaged in the production of iron and steel and generation of power, washing of coal obtained from mine or production of cement, is entitled to the allocation in addition to Central Government, a Central Government company or a Central Government corporation.

156. In this context, it is worthwhile to note that the 1957 Act has been amended introducing Section 11-A w.e.f. 13.02.2012. As per the said amendment, the grant of reconnaissance permit or prospecting licence or mining lease in respect of an area containing coal or lignite can be made only through selection through auction by competitive bidding even among the eligible entities under Section 3(3)(a)(iii), referred to above. However, Government companies, Government corporations or companies or corporations, which have been awarded power projects on the basis of competitive bids for tariff (including Ultra Mega Power Projects) have been exempted of allocation in favour of them is not meant to be through the competitive bidding process.

157. As we have already found that the allocations made, both under the Screening Committee route and the Government dispensation route, are arbitrary and illegal, what should be the consequences, is the issue which remains to be tackled. We are of the view that, to this limited extent, the matter requires further hearing."

(3.)Accordingly, we heard several learned counsels appearing for a very large number of interveners, impleadment applicants and State Governments. Substantive submissions were made, amongst others, by the Coal Producers Association, the Independent Power Producers Association of India and the Sponge Iron Manufacturers Association. These associations had also been heard on an earlier occasion well before judgment was delivered on 25th August, 2014.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.