@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.@mdashAll these writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners for direction on the respondents to release coal in terms of linkage.
2. Their grievance is that the quantity of coal, as mentioned in the linkage is not being supplied to them, rather lesser quantity without any basis.
3. The stand taken by the respondents in some of the cases is that they are supplying coal to linked consumers as per the Maximum Permissible Quantity (MPQ) fixed as per the policy decision of coal companies taken in respect to non-core unit linkage holder.
4. Mr. Tiwary, counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners units having been set up recently, most of them having not completed three calendar years, the respondents cannot determine the MPQ on the basis of yearly average of best booking.
5. The question relating to supply of coal on the basis of MPQ fell for consideration before this Court in the case of Maya Fuel Private Limited v. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and others, W.P. (C) No. 4790 of 2001 reported in 2002 (3) JCR 196 (Jhr). In the said case, the Court vide its judgment dated 14th August, 2001 held :--
"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 the 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 petitioners."
6. The recent policy of coal companies relating to determination of MPQ is generally applicable to linked consumers lifting coal at least for three years. That does not mean that the consumers who have lifted coal for an year to two or for a new unit no assessment can be made by the coal companies. In the case of such consumer also, assessment of MPQ can be made on the basis of best booking of any of the calendar year and in the case of new applicant on the basis of some enquiry and subject to availability of coal. In case any consumer has not lifted coal for a year, such unit may ask for re-assessment of linkage quantity/MPQ for any good ground and, in the meantime, can lift coal as it may be lifting for the present, subject to its availability.
7. All these writ petitions are dismissed, but with the aforesaid liberty.
