M/S.Girindra Hard Coke Enterpr Vs Central Coalfields Ltd. And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

M/S.Girindra Hard Coke Enterpr Vs Central Coalfields Ltd. And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether Central Coalfields Limited must refund to the petitioner the 20% increased basic price charged/paid in excess of the notified price for the linked quantity of coal supplied from November 2006 to March 2008, together with the amount deducted at e-auction rate and interest calculated from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In light of the above order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No.11793 of 2025 / 2025 SCC OnLine 1963, whereby the High Court's order was set aside, the appeal allowed, and the 20% established as not refundable by CCL to coal consumers), there is nothing to be decided in the present writ petition and the case of the petitioner is covered in light of the said judgment.

Key takeaways

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.ratio¶¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No. 434 of 2011 (High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi; Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.; decided 01.04.2026) — M/s Girindra Hard Coke Enterprises had prayed for a command upon Central Coalfields Limited (CCL) to refund the 20% increased basic price charged/paid in excess of the notified price for the linked quantity of coal for November 2006 to March 2008, together with the amount deducted at e-auction rate and interest from the date of deposit till actual payment. Counsel for the petitioner and for respondent-CCL jointly submitted that the subject matter had gone before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.21888 of 2012, subsequently registered as Civil Appeal No.11793 of 2025 (Coal India Ltd and others v. M/s Rahul Industries and others, 2025 SCC OnLine 1963), wherein the order of the High Court was set aside and the appeal allowed, meaning thereby that the 20% is not to be refunded by CCL to the coal consumers. Holding that, in light of that Supreme Court order, nothing remained to be decided and the petitioner's case stood covered by the said judgment, the court dismissed the writ petition.

2026:JHHC:9358

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

----

W.P.(C) No. 434 of 2011

----

M/s Girindra Hard Coke Enterprises, having its Unit situated at Morangi, PO and PS Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, through its proprietor Rajendra Prasad, son of late Jawahar Saw, resident of K.B. Path, Boddam Bazar, PO and PS Hazaribagh, Dist Hazaribagh…… …. .... Petitioner(s)

-- Versus --

1.Central Coalfields Limited, a subsidiary of Coal India Limited, Darbhanga House, PS Kotwali, District Ranchi, through its Chairman Cum Managing Director

2.The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, PS Kotwali, District Ranchi

3.The General Manager, (Sales and Marketing), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi

4.The Deputy Chief Sales Manager (RS) Sales and Marketing Division, Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi

5.The SOM (RS) Sales and Marketing Division, Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, PS Kotwali, District Ranchi

…… ….. .... Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

For the Petitioner(s) :- Mr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Resp.-CCL :- Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate

6 /01.04.2026 Heard Mr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for

the petitioner and Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent -Central Coalfields Limited (CCL).

The prayer in this writ petition is made for commanding

upon the respondent Central Coalfields Limited /CCL to refund the

1 W.P.(C) No. 434 of 2011

2026:JHHC:9358

petitioner the 20 % increased basic price having charged/ paid in excess of the notified price of the linked quantity of coal for the period November, 2006 to March, 2008 together with the amount deducted in CCL Collieries at e-auction rate together with the interest to be calculated from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent CCL jointly submit that the subject matter was before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (SLP) (Civil) No.21888 of 2012 subsequently which has been registered as Civil Appeal No.11793 of 2025 and the said appeal was preferred by Coal India Ltd and others against M/s Rahul Industries and others reported in 2025 SCC OnLine 1963 whereby the order of the High Court has been set aside and the appeal has been allowed meaning thereby, 20% is not to be refunded by the CCL to the coal consumers.

In light of the above order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, there is nothing to be decided in the present writ petition and the case of the petitioner is covered in light of the said judgment.

As such, this writ petition is dismissed.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Dated : 01.04.2026 SI/

2 W.P.(C) No. 434 of 2011