- (1.) The petitioners have prayed for quashing the order of termination of Fuel Supply Agreement dated 16/19.11.2010 entered into between the petitioners and respondents No. 2 to 4 and for issuing a writ,- order or direction in the nature of mandamus not to give effect to the order of termination. Further prayer is to quash clause 4.4 of Fuel Supply Agreement executed between Bharat Coking Coal Limited ('BCCL' for short) for direction to extend the Fuel Supply Agreement for further 17 months for which the supply of coal was not given by the respondents.
(2.) The petitioners had applied for grant of coal linkage. Respondent No. 2 and its subsidiaries after making complete assessment of plant/ unit of the petitioners recommended grant of coal linkage for allotment of coal per month. The quota and quantity of 5,000 tones of coal every month to each of the petitioners was allowed vide order dated 2S.03.1996 and 02.11.1999. Sometime in the year 1997-98, supply of steam coal to the petitioner was discontinued. The petitioner challenged the said order before this Court. This Court had then allowed the writ petition and order in this regard is at Annexure P-7. The respondents had then assailed this order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and their SLP was dismissed. The supply of coal thereafter was resumed.
(3.) Sometime in the March 2005, the respondents came out with the policy of Education. It is alleged that the respondents abruptly without any reason stopped the supply of coal to most of the industrial units. As per the petitioners, this was done in collusion with the big traders with a motive for black marketing of the coal and elimination of small consumers tike the petitioners. This policy was challenged before the Hon'ble High Courts of Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra and Orissa. Ultimately, the Hon'ble Supreme Court declared the E-auction scheme to sell coal to be ultravires by allowing the SLP.;