M.N.Shukla, J. - (1.) This is an application for a writ in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondents, namely, the Director, Movement, Railways, Railway Board, Calcutta and the Director, Transport (Coal) Calcutta to treat the petitioners' Glass Unit at par with that of the Advance Glass Works, the West Glass Works, the Emkary Glass Works and others for the transportation of coal and to deliver the coal wagons in the same way as are being delivered to those Glass Units. The petitioners have also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to supply the movement of sponsored Railway wagons month to month in the case without undue delay.
(2.) Petitioner No. 1 is a Glass Industrial Unit and manufacturing Block Glass and Imitation Glass. The factory is registered as Small Scale Industry and uses coal as fuel and energy. The petitioners purchase coal directly from Coal India Limited through its agent Mrs. Sikri Brothers. The loading of Railway wagons with coal is done under the supervision of respondent No. 1. It is alleged that the Director of Industries, U. P. has got certain number of Railway wagons at his disposal. It is his function through his various subordinate officers to assess the minimum requirement of coal on the basis of policies adopted after reckoning certain factors such as capacity of furnace, the production given by a particular factory etc. Having determined requirement of each Glass Unit the Director of Industries makes a recommendation of the number of Railway wagons which ought to be allotted to a Unit for ihe transportation of coal. This system is known as sponsoring. The petitioners' claim is that after considering all the relevant factors the Director of Industries made a recommendation of 46 wagons to the Director, Movement, Railways, Calcutta, respondent No. 1 in favour of the petitioners. The allegation is that respondent No. 1 i.e. the Director, Movement, Railways, Calcutta unjustly started discriminating between the petitioners and other Glass Units similarly situate such as the Advance Glass Works, the West Glass Works, the Quality Glass Works, the Jain Scientific Glass Works, India Optical Glass Works and others. The result of this unequal treatment was that though the recommendation of the Director of Industries for sponsoring the wagons had been made in the same manner with respect to the other Glass Units aforementioned as it had been in the case of the petitioner, yet to those Glass Units entire wagons for January, 1980 had been delivered in March, 1980, while in the case of the petitioners the wagons due for the month of January, 1979 had not been delivered even in the month of March, 1980. In short, the petitioners' Glass Unit was being delivered the wagons after a period of about 13 months from the date of the month of sponsoring while in the case of other Glass Units the wagons duly sponsored and recommended for a particular month were being delivered after a period of three months only from its due date. This according to the peti tioners had been occasioned by the flagrant discrimination and favouritism practised by respondent No, 1. In this situation the petitioners were obliged to purchase coal from the open market at exorbitant rates causing great hardship and loss to them.
(3.) The respondents contested the writ petition on several grounds. They contended that the Director of Industries, U. P. had no wagons at his disposal, he was merely a sponsoring/ recommending authority to accord higher priority Item "C (iii)" instead of lower priority Item "E(ii)" of the Preferential Traffic Schedule for movement of coal for industries in the State of U. P. Sponsorship only determines entitlement of the sponsored consumers for allotment of wagons under priority Item "C (iii)" of the Preferential Traffic Schedule but does not ipso facto convey any assurance or guarantee for the allotment of wagons as recommended. Allotment of wagons is made on day-to-day availability of the requisite type and grade of coal and of Railway wagons. The respondents' case further is that the allotment of wagons for transport of coal is made in accordance with set rules and procedure in a fair and equitable manner and whatever facility is available to other similarly situate consumers is provided to the petitioners as well. It was stated that the allotment of wagons depended on the day-to-day availability of coal of the requisite type and grade as offered by the coal companies and that when a particular type and grade of coal could be obtained the available wagons were allotted to the consumers of that particular type and grade of coal. It was pointed out that the Advance Glass Works, the West Glass Works, the Quality Glass Works, the Jain Scientific Glass Works, India Optical Glass Works and some other Units used higher grade, selected grades of Steam Coal while the petitioners used grade I Steam Coal. As regards the procedure the respondent submitted that though Steam Coal was non-controlled, the supply of selected or superior grades of coal was regulated by a Technical Committee of Coal India Ltd. for preservation of this quality of coal. Due to limited demands of selected grade of Steam Coal, allotment of wagons against offers on programmes of such coal was current, while allotment against offers of grade I Steam Coal on large number of programmes for such coal was in arrears. The charge of discrimination was emphatically denied and it was stated that no preference was given to any one with regard to the movement of wagons for transport of coal.;