- (1.) IN this writ application the petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate direction upon the respondents to charge the price of coal as per its grading and further for a direction to refund the excess amount realised from the petitioners against the supply of lower grade coal.
(2.) THE petitioners case is that the coal of any seam or section of a seam occurring in colliery has been categorised into grades in terms of the provisions of Section 3 -A of the Colliery Control order. The Coal Controller has also laid down the standard and method of sampling of the coal in the matter of declaration of grades or size of coal. According to the petitioners, in Tapin South and Tapin North collieries the grade of coal has been categorised as washery grade IV and washery grade III respectively. In spite of that the respondents have illegally and arbitrarily realised the price from the petitioners against the supply of coal in excess of the grade of coal fixed in the aforementioned two collieries. The respondents, in their counter affidavit, have stated that the petitioners unit booked the benefitting coal from the Road Sales Centre by employing manual loaders/ picking and have ample opportunities for selective loading and hence their claim for supply of inferior grade of coal is not tenable. It is stated that the petitioners are getting coal from the Road Sales Centre and not from the Coal face. It is stated that the prevailing practice of charging service charge was known to the petitioners prior to the booking and lifting of coal and. therefore, they cannot be allowed to make a claim for refund of any amount whatsoever.
(3.) I have heard Mr. A.K. Sinha, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mrs. Banani Verma, learned counsel appearing for the C.C.L.;