SHILLONG, March 20: The Meghalaya High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking spot inquiry into the extracted coal lying at Jadigittim, Baghmara in South Garo Hills district.
The PIL was filed by a former MLA Rophul S Marak and Robinson Ch. Sangma.
In its order passed on March 14, the full bench headed by Chief Justice S Vaidyanathan said, “After hearing both sides, we are of the view that in case the petitioners want to put forth their arguments in the PIL, which is already pending, they have to get themselves intervened in the said matter and make submissions and a separate PIL is not maintainable.”
Related Posts:
“That apart, the matter is pending before the One Man Committee and it is open to the petitioners, if so advised, to place all the factors before the One Man Committee so as to enable the said Committee to submit a detailed report before this Court. Hence we are of the view that the present PIL is not maintainable and the same is dismissed with the above observation,” the bench added.
The PIL has been filed seeking to direct BP Katakey (Retd) Judge or any independent investigation agency/agencies to conduct the spot inquiry into the extracted coal lying at Depot No .10 at Jadigittim, South Garo Hills District Baghmara; to direct the state respondents and other respondents to strictly implement and comply with the direction of the Supreme Court and to completely restrain the state respondent and other respondent authorities from the sale of extracted coal through spot e-auction by Coal India Limited from Depot No.10 , Jadigittim South Garo Hills district.
The petitioners had stated, “That the secretary to the mining and geology department, government of Meghalaya also have issue the list of quantity of seized coal district wise, which are to be auctioned namely in East Jaintia Hills District, West Khasi Hills district, South Garo Hills district and West Jaintia Hills District and according to the district wise seized coal it was indicated that 35, 271,68 are still existing remaining in South Garo Hills district Meghalaya. It is stated herein that the extracted coal mention District Wise on 07.10.2023 by the Secretary to the Mining and Geology department Govt. of Meghalaya is completely different and does not tally with the detail of lot for e -auction provided by the Coal India Limited which was enclosed in the letter dated 25.09.2023 by the Director of Mineral Resources Meghalaya Shillong, whereas as per the detail lot for e -auction by Coal India Limited which was enclosed in the letter dated 25.09.2023 the extracted coal lying in the Depot No.10 at Jadigittim is only 86 quantity of Metric Tons but as per the District Wise quantity of seized coal report dated 07.10.2023 furnished by the Secretary Mining and Geology Department Govt. of Meghalaya in respect of South Garo Hills District is 35,271,68 which is confusing and required for spot verification.”
The Advocate General submitted that the matter is already pending before the One Man Committee and that he is inquiring the same and also submitting his periodical report before this Court.
There is also a communication as stated by the petitioners in Annexure -6, with regard to spot e-auction by Coal India Limited.
Learned Advocate General also submitted that the petitioners have not approached this Court really with the public interest, but out of their personal interests, which is impermissible, besides not maintainable.
The order said on March 5, 2024 when the matter was taken up in a division bench consisting of the Chief Justice and W. Diengdoh, J, an objection has been raised about the maintainability of the PIL and this Court has passed a detailed order which reads as follows:
“When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that this public interest litigation is connected with the batch of cases, pending before the full bench.”
The counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that this is not a public interest litigation rather it can be termed as a private litigation by projecting it to espouse the cause of public at large and that the maintainability of the PIL itself is questioned. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly admitted that similar points have already been raised in the subject matter pending before the full bench.
“In order to bring quietus to the matter, we incline to take up this matter along with the other batch of matters pending before the full bench. We also make it very clear that in case we accept the plea of the respondents that it is only private interest litigation, then heavy costs will be imposed on the petitioners. Post the matter on 14.03.2024,” it said.
