9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner- M/s Lanco Amarkantak Power Limited (hereinafter 'LAPL') against Respondent No.1- Ministry of Coal, Respondent No.2- South Eastern Coalfields Limited (hereinafter 'SECL') as also Respondent No.3- Ministry of Power seeking quashing of the impugned show cause notices dated 22nd November, 2022 issued by SECL. 3. The background of the matter is that a Coal Supply Agreement (hereinafter 'CSA') was signed between the Petitioner and SECL on 28th August, 2013. As per the said agreement the 'Commitment Guarantees' which were given by the Petitioner were converted into 'Security Deposits' which were lying with SECL as Bank Guarantees. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ategory i.e. Category A and B from Para 3 (i) and (ii). This list is attached as Annexure-II of these Minutes. ii. Category II: Projects which are only partly commissioned & have been referred to or admitted under NCLT waiting for resolution. A total of 11 projects come under this category. The list is at Annexure-III. iii. Category III: Projects which are at very initial stage of construction and are totally stalled. Such projects have either been ordered to be liquidated or are heading towards liquidation. A total of 6 projects will come under this category. The list is at Annexure-IV." In the Minutes of the said meeting, the power plant of the Petitioner was categorized in Category II. 5. It is the case of the Petitioner that vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istries. He, however, points out that insofar as the decision for non-cancellation taken in March, 2019 was concerned, the same related to only PPAs and not Fuel Supply Agreements or Coal supply agreements. It is further submitted by him that the Minutes which are relied upon by the Petitioner dated September, 2019 do not give any further extension beyond 31st March, 2022 to the Petitioner. 8. Mr. Das, ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the SECL has made two-fold submissions. His first submission is that the present writ petition has been filed by an employee of the corporate debtor undergoing CIRP upon being authorised by the Resolution Professional which is not permissible. As per the ld. Senior Counsel only the Resolution Professional was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Annexure P-2 (Colly)] for satisfaction of the Conditions Precedent, till 48 months from date of resolution of the Petitioner; D. Pass such other further orders, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit & proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case as also in the interest of justice." 10. A perusal of the prayers in the writ would show that the relief being sought is in respect of two show cause notices dated 22nd November, 2022. It is further prayed that the Respondents ought to act in terms of the office memorandum dated 8th March, 2019 as also 1st October, 2019 and not cancel the CSA. 11. The admitted position on record is that the Petitioner is undergoing insolvency proceedings. It is also admitted that the project is yet t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
