Vikramaditya Prasad, J. - (1.) HEARD both sides.
(2.) THE petitioner has filed this writ for command upon the respondents to grant permanent linkage to the petitioner for lifting slurry from Kathara washery at the rate of 60,000 M.T. per year and also for a direction that the petitioner is entitled to permanent linkage with effect from 11.12.1994, the date on which M/s. Bharat Coal Products, respondent No. 8, was granted linkage and consequential benefits of such declaration, with damage and also restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's right to lift slurry as a linked consumer. The petitioner carries on a business of manufacturing of coke briquettes since year 1989, under the name and style of M/s. Goyal Trading Company, which has been registered with the State Government as a small scale industrial unit. Near Kathara Coal Wassery of C.C.L., which according to the petitioner went on applying for supply of linkage for lifting slurry from Kathara Washery as raw material as the unit is a small scale industrial unit and despite Court's order and, the inspection report etc, which was favourable to the petitioner the petitioner has not been given linkage for lifting slurry and in a similarly situated circumstance the respondent No. 8, was given the linkage.
(3.) BY Annexure -4 it is found that the unit of the petitioner was inspected and the report was submitted. By Annexure -5 the writ filed in the Calcutta High Court was disposed of whereby the respondent was directed to consider the case of the petitioner for lifting the coal and to pass reasoned order. Thereafter it appears that the representation of the petitioner was rejected, reasoned order was passed and communicated to the petitioner vide Annexure -6. The petitioner gave point to point reply and reiterating its demand for linkage of coal vide Annexure -7, with damage thereto. Thereafter, vide Annexure -10 on 3.3.1994 the Calcutta High Court directed the Coal controller respondent to pass reasoned order within a period of 3 weeks. In the meantime the respondent No. 8, which is allegedly similarly situated with the petitioner, had approached the Court and got the same relief. By Annexure -11 the Coal Controller passed a common order with respect to this petitioner and also respondent No. 9, holding that both were eligible and, thus directed to grant quota at the rate of 60,000/ M.T. per annum, from the respective Wassery, namely, Kathara. Thereafter the Sales Manager, C.C.L. wrote a letter dated 21.7.1994, to the General Manager (K.T.A.) CCL, Kathara for release of 60,000 M.T. slurry from Kathara. Thereafter vide Annexure 19 on 11.12.1994 the linkage advice letter was issued in favour of Bharat Coal Products without considering the case of the petitioner. The petitioner went on requesting the respondent No. 2, to release the slurry to him but he was asked to withdraw the case, which was filed before the Calcutta High Court and asked the petitioner to come through tender, which according to the petitioner is arbitrary and malicious. In 110th meeting of the linkage committee held on 18.5.2001, although M/s. Bharat Coal Products got the linkage but despite the Coal Controller orders the petitioner's case has not been processed and the matter was duly referred to C.C.L. Then on 20.6.2001 vide Annexure -24, it was found that there was availability of stocked slurry in C.C.L. and this was communicated to the General Manager (Sales), C.C.L. Thereafter the petitioner again made a representation to the Chief General Manager (WS), BCW Area , C.C.L. Kathara (Bokaro) on 30.11.2001 and he was informed by Annexure -28, that the petitioner's case had been forwarded to C.G.M. (WS)/BCW for examination and for further action. Despite all these the petitioner was not granted linkage. Therefore, the petitioner has come to this Court for the relief aforesaid.;