Bharat Aluminium Company Limited v. Union Of India And ORS.

-1 L

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

^(»^- WKIT PETITIQN (C) NQ.

OF 2014 PETITIONER Bharat Aluminium Company Limited, Company registered under the Companies Act, having its Registered Office at "Aluminium Sadan"

Core-6, Scope Office Complex, 7- Lodhi Road, New Delhi and its Aluminium' manufacturing Plant at P.0.

Balconagar, Korba (Chhattisgarh) ^f.^ .'\\ly.

^y y^'

VERSUS

RESPONDENTS 1.

Union of Tndia through its Secretaiy, Ministiy of Coal, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi 110001 (India) 2.

Coal In'dia Limited 1, Netaji Subhash Road, Kolkata-700001 (West Bengal) Through its Chairruan and Managing Director.

3.

South Eastefn Coalfields Ltd., (A subsidiary of Coal India Limited), Registered Office'

Vasant Vihar, Seepat Road .Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Through its Chairaian and Managing Director.

WRITL PETITIOIL UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THB CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE QF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT QR WRITS, DIRECTIQN OR DIRECTIONS, ORDER OR ORDERS:

The petitioner, above-named most respectfully submits as under:

1.

PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER:

As mentioned in the Cause Titie above.

2.

PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS:

As mentioned in the-Cause Title above.

^<

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURDIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI NAVIN SINHA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE SHRI P. SAM KOSHY, J.

Writ Petition (C) No. 2462 of 2014 BharatAluminium Company Limited.

VERSUS

PETmQNER Union of India & Others.

RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas, Assistant Solicitor General for i :Etli&Lli"iion 6f India.

;

;

^ I, ^ ^Sttri R.K.Gupta, Advocataforthe Respondent No. 1 & 2.

ORDER

(13thofJanuary,2015) Per Navin Sinha. Aca. C.J.

1.

This matter has been listed under the heading "office notes" in view of its being tagged with Writ Petition (C) No. 1365 of 2014 in which there were procedural issues.

2.

At this stage itself, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner prays for leave to withdraw this writ application with liberty to pursue matters at a later stage, if necessary.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Respondents have no objection to the same.

4.

The writ application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid.

Sd/- P.SamXoshy Judge Sd/- ActingChiefJustice Amit ^