S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. - (1.) This writ application has been preferred by the petitioners for a direction on the respondents to release full quota of coal in terms of linkage and also to release/despatch the fixed quantity of monthly quota of coal.
(2.) The stand taken by the respondents is that the petitioners are entitled for coal as per the Maximum Permissible Quantity (MPQ), on the basis of the policy decision taken for all linked non -core units.
(3.) Similar dispute fell for consideration before a Bench of this Court in the case of Maya Fuel Private Limited v/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and others, W.R (C) No. 4790 of 2001 reported in, 2002 (3) JCR 196 (Jhr) In the said case, the Court vide judgment dated 14th August, 2002, held as follows: - - "In view of discussions and reasons, as made and given above. I come to the conclusion and hold : - - (i) The linkage quantity and Maximum Permissible Quota (MPQ) are not different but same. (ii) It can be revised on the request of a linked consumer for good ground and similarly the coal company can also revise the linkage quantity/MPQ, in cases such as less availability of coal than the demand, lifting of lesser quantity than the linkage quantity for years together by the linked consumer etc. (iii) The assessment of linkage quantity/MPQ can be made by a subsidiary coal company with whom a consumer is linked. (iv) The assessment based on the best booking of consumer during any of the three calendar year is reasonable and not arbitrary having nexus with the consumption of a consumer and availability of coal. (v) In case of wrong assessment of linkage quantity/MPQ based on incorrect data etc., the linked consumer can request the coal company for re -assessment of linkage quota/MPQ. The issues are determined, accordingly, in favour of the respondents and against the petitioner.";