Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) The Petitioner No. 1 is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1556. The Petitioner No. 2 Company. However, the writ petition had been affirmed by one Sri Har Charan Dass, claims to be one of the Directors of the Petitioner No. 1 Company.
(2.) However, this high Court had originally entertained the writ petition, a Rule was issued and affidavits were exchanged between the parties long back. Now the matter in placed under the heading of 'old matters' and subsequently under 'old adjourned matters'.
(3.) Previously the writ petition was moved only for the purpose of taking the delivery of the goods which were lying within the premises of the concerned coal mines under the Central Coalfields Authority, contesting Respondent herein. But by way of challenging vires of the amendment of Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, an application was moved before the Court for the purpose of adding such additional grounds etc. which was accordingly allowed. Therefore, at the present moment, Court is concerned about both the grounds.;