9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 642X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Attorney General appearing for the Union of India submitted that the Union of India does not propose to acquire the end user plant of the respondent, as apprehended by the respondent. He further submitted that since the basic concern of the respondent is only to ensure that he is not deprived of his property without adequate compensation, the Union of India gives an undertaking to earmark that portion of the land occupied by the end user plant falling within the coal block area and exclude the same from the process of auction and vesting contemplated under the Ordinance so that the rights of property of the respondent remain intact. In view of the fact that the Writ Petition is pending in the High Court, we do not propose to examine the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndum of the appellant dated 6th December, 2007, which was subsequently renewed on 24.2.2014. 4. Pursuant to the said allotment, the third respondent herein executed a mining lease in respect of the said coal block in favour of the first respondent. 5. The legality of the various allotments of the coal blocks became the subject matter of public interest litigation before this Court. By judgments dated 25.8.2014 and 24.9.2014, the allocation of various coal blocks including the one allocated in favour of the first respondent was cancelled. 6. As a consequence, an Ordinance came to be promulgated by the President of India known as the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Second Ordinance, 2014 (No. 7 of 2014). 7. Under Section 4 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the coal block area without the payment of any compensation and therefore various articles of the Constitution of India are violated including Article 300A. Pending adjudication of such a claim, by way of an interim order, the first respondent sought stay of the auction of the coal block of which he was the earlier allottee. 13. While declining to stay the auction as sought by the first respondent, the order impugned in the instant appeal came to be passed. 14. The learned Attorney General appearing for the Union of India submitted that the Union of India does not propose to acquire the end user plant of the respondent, as apprehended by the respondent. The observations such as the one made by the High Court (which is extracted ear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
