THE STATE OF BIHAR versus THE TATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD.

Citation: [1995] 2 S.C.R. 102 · Decided: 17-02-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
THE STATE OF BIHAR 
v. 
THE TATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD. 
FEBRUARY 17, 1995 
[KULDIP SINGH, B.L. HANSARIA AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.) 
Colliery Control Order, 1945: Clauses 2(2), 4, 5, 7, 8, 10-A, 11, 12-B, 
· 12-E and 12-G. 
C 
Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order 1984: 
.. 
Clauses 2(e), 19, 20 and 21. 
Company-Owner of captive coking coal mines-Establishment of coke 
oven plants within factory premises-Regular sale of non-metallurgical 
D coaHleld Company was a colliery under 1945 Order and a dealer under 
1984 Order-Company despite being colliery held bound by the provisions of 
1984 Order-Held 1945 Order and 1984 Order operate in two different fields 
and are not in conflict with each other-Scope and purpose of both the Orders 
explained. 
E 
The respondent-company having its own captive 'coking coal mines' 
and 'coke oven plants' was regularly selling non-metallurgical coal in the 
open market. It was prosecuted for violation of the Bihar Trade Articles 
(Licence Unification) Order, 1984. A Division Bench of the Patna High 
Court, following its earlier judgment in Black Diamond Industries and Ors. 
F v. Coal Controller and Ors., (1986) B.L.T. (Reports) 127; held the company 
being a colliery, the Colliery Control Order, 1945 was applicable to it and 
the 1984 Order has no application to it, In state's appeal to this Court on 
the question whether a colliery which was governed by 1945 Order can, in 
addition, be made to follow the provisions of 1984 Order issued by the 
State Government: it was contended that the coke oven plants of the 
G Company having been .constructed within the factory premises, it cannot 
be considered to be a part of the coal mine and as such cannot come within 
the definition of 'colliery' under the 1945 Order. 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned ju~ent of the 
H High Court, this Court 
102 
' 
STATE v. TATA IRON AND STEEL 
103 
HELD : l. The High Court was right in reaching the conclusion that A 
the Company is a colliery under the Colliery Control Order, 1945. A plain 
reading of the definition given under clause 2(2) of the Order makes it 
clear that it specifically include 'a plant for the production of coke or for 
the washing of coal', The inclusive definition has been given with a purpose. 
Ordinarily, the coke oven plant is at a place where coking coal is converted B 
into coke for the purpose of using the same in the industry. Coke oven 
plants are, therefore, set up at various places where hard coke is needed 
for the industry. Since hard coke also comes within the definition of '<;oal' 
under the Order and is subject to control by the Central Government 
authorities, the coke oven plants which produce hard coke have been 
rightly included in the definition of 'colliery'. (109-E-F] 
C 
2. There is no jurisdiction for the respondent-Company for not 
complying with the provisions of the Unification Order. The respondent-
Company despite being a colliery is bound by the provisions of the Unifica-
tion Order if it is found to be a dealer under the said Order. There is not D 
doubt that the Company is regularly selling non-metallurgical coal in the 
open market and as such it cannot be said that it is not engaged in the 
business of sale or storage for sale of non-metallurgical coal. Thus there 
is no hesitation in holding that the company is a dealer under the Unifica-
tion Order. (113-D, 114-E] 
3. Examined from another angle, the Central Government by the 
Notification dated July 27, 1967 has permitted free sale of non-metallurgi-
E 
cal coal provided it is consumed in India. When the said coal is sold in 
open market in the State of Bihar the provisions of the Unification Order, 
which are meant to protect the interest of the consumers, are squarely F 
attracted and are to be followed even by a colliery which falls within the 
definition of 'Dealer' under the said Order. (112-H, 113-A] 
4. It is obvious from the provisions of the Colliery Control Order, 
1945 that it tends to regulate coal from the stage of production to the stage 
of consumption including price control and inspection. Under the scheme G 
of the Order, the coking coal from various coal mines is allotted to various 
persons. The provisions· of the Order give wide powers to the Central 
Government to ensure that the coal extracted from the mines is properly 
'utilised for the benefit of the industry and other purposes. Apart from that, 
the provisions of the Order give wide powers to

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.