ORDER
1. Though this appeal was directed to be linked with LPA Nos. 290 and 291 of 2001, considering the nature of the submissions made before us and the limited point involved we delink this appeal from those appeals and we are finally disposing of this appeal by this judgment.
2. Counsel on both sides were heard in detail.
This appeal by the Central Coalfields Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the CCL) and its officers, is directed against the decision of the learned single Judge only in so far as it relates to a direction to the CCL authorities not to suspend or stop the supply of linked coal to those consumers with whom it had linkage, merely on the basis of information furnished or decision taken by the District Industries Centre or the Industries Department of the State Government.
3. According to counsel for the CCL, the CCL has no source of information of its own to ensure whether all the persons to whom it supplies coal, are properly utilising the coal or mis-utilising it and in this process, the CCL has to rely upon the information furnished by the Industries Department or the State Government agencies or even by strangers. Obviously, based on such information, the CCL straightaway cannot suspend or stop supply of coal without even giving an opportunity to the concerned consumer of being heard. Such action would be bad in law.
4. The learned single Judge in the judgment under appeal, has directed the CCL to give an opportunity of hearing to the respondent Alok Glass Industries and then to decide the question of continuing the supply as per the linkage. After all, once supply is being made, the same cannot be stopped without giving that person an opportunity to show that the quantum of coal that was being supplied as per the linkage, was not being properly utilized by him. The direction in that behalf is justified. But, the other direction that the report of the Industries Department should not be made use of by the CCL does not appear to us to be necessary or proper. After all, whatever may be the source of information, it is the duty of the CCL to ensure that the coal supplied by it is not being mis-utilised. But based on any such information clearly it is not open to the CCL to stop supply without giving an opportunity to the concerned allottee to coal to show cause against any action that may be proposed by the CCL based on the information that it has gathered. In that view, we think that the direction by the learned single Judge, in the judgment under appeal to the effect that the CCL cannot act on the report of the District Industries Centre, cannot be justified. It calls for interference. We set it aside. The only direction called for is not to withhold or suspend the supply of coal as per linkage based on such information without giving an opportunity of hearing to the concerned allottee.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner submitted that coal was not being supplied for quite some time now and the CCL may be directed to expedite the process of hearing the respondent and resuming the supply of coal on the basis of the linkage.
6. Hence, we direct the CCL to forthwith issue a notice to the respondent to show cause why the supply should not be suspended or withheld and after giving a hearing to the respondent, to take a decision on the question and if it is found that the supply is not liable to be suspended of stopped, the CCL should resume the supply of coal as per the linkage to the respondent without delay. The entire process of decision-making will be completed within six weeks from today. In the notice to show cause the CCL will necessarily indicate the reasons for the issuance of notice.
7. This appeal, therefore, is disposed of by modifying or clarifying the direction of the learned single Judge by directing that whatever may be the source of information that could be utilised by the CCL. The supply of coal based on linkage cannot be suspended or stopped by the CCL without giving an opportunity of being heard to the concerned consumer of coal. The question of suspending or stopping the supply to the respondent will be considered after notice as indicated above.