Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10028 (GAU)

Jys Construction v. General Manager

2026-02-05

N Unni Krishnan Nair

body2026
JUDGMENT : N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The above noted writ petitions having been instituted assailing the communication dated 10-02-2022 issued by the Managing Director, Assam Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. and the grounds of challenge being one and the same, the said writ petitions, as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties were taken up for consideration analogously. The said writ petitions are accordingly being disposed of by the present order. 3. In the above noted writ petitions the challenge is to a communication dated 10-02- 2022 issued by the Managing Director, Assam Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (in short “AMDCL”) to the Chief Freight Transportation Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon, inter alia, stipulating therein that the transit permits/ supporting documents/ papers submitted by the intending coal transporters should be sent to the office of the Managing Director, AMDCL, Assam for verification and issue of NOC jointly by him and the Directorate of Geology and Mining, Assam, before transportation of the coal by rail rake from any railway station situated in the State of Assam. 4. In the above writ petitions, the petitioners have projected that they are involved in the business of trading of coal and by procuring coal from the State of Nagaland and the State of Meghalaya they transport the same through road to the State of Assam for further transportation by railways to different States in the country. It is projected that while transporting the coal from Meghalaya and/ or Nagaland, the petitioners so dispatch the coal with all valid supporting documents, viz. Coal Mining Lease Certificate, Affidavit- cum-Indemnity Bond by the consignor, NOC and Transit Passes issued by the competent authorities along with memorandum of understanding between the parties, sale order, production details etc. The documents as sent along with the consignment of coal by the petitioners is projected to be necessary for permitting the trucks carrying such coal to enter into the State of Assam and also for production before the Railway authorities for registration of intents for allotment of rakes for transportation of coals involved. The documents as sent along with the consignment of coal by the petitioners is projected to be necessary for permitting the trucks carrying such coal to enter into the State of Assam and also for production before the Railway authorities for registration of intents for allotment of rakes for transportation of coals involved. It is further projected in the writ petitions that no dispute has been raised in the matter by the respondent No. 3 and/ or any other authority that the documents produced by the petitioners of coals procured from Nagaland and Meghalaya were forged and/ or not genuine. It is while the petitioners were carrying on their business in the above manner that the Managing Director of AMDCL, i.e. the respondent No. 3 issued a communication dated 10-02-2022 to the Chief Freight Transportation Manager, N.R. Railway, Maligaon and required the railway authorities to transport the coal booked by different coal transporters only after obtaining a NOC from the respondent No. 3 and the Directorate of Geology and Mining, Assam. Being aggrieved by the said communication dated 10-02-2022, the petitioners have instituted the above noted writ petitions presenting a challenge to the said communication. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners by reiterating the facts noticed, hereinabove, have submitted that the communication dated 10-02-2022 issued by the respondent No. 3 has been so issued without any jurisdiction. It is submitted by the learned counsel petitioners that the communication dated 10-02-2022 and the stipulation made therein is in clear violation of the provisions of Article 301 of the Constitution of India which mandates free trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India. It is projected that with regard to the coal procured from the State of Nagaland by complying with the requirements as laid down in the matter by the Govt. of Nagaland, amounts to violations of the provisions of Article 371A of the Constitution of India. It is also projected that stipulation as contained in the impugned communication dated 10-02- 2022 also violates the provisions of the Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. In view of the above position, the petitioners have prayed for an interference with the impugned communication dated 10-02-2022. 6. It is also projected that stipulation as contained in the impugned communication dated 10-02- 2022 also violates the provisions of the Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. In view of the above position, the petitioners have prayed for an interference with the impugned communication dated 10-02-2022. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the State of Nagaland and the State of Meghalaya have supported the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners and have submitted that the respondent No. 3 cannot introduce any further conditionality for transportation of coal obtained from the State of Nagaland and the State of Meghalaya which is projected to be so done by complying with the provisions of law enacted in the said States for the purpose. 7. Mr. P. Sharmah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3, on instruction, submitted that the communication dated 10-02-2022 was necessitated to be issued by the respondent No. 3, on it coming to notice that Assam origin coal was being mixed with coal procured from other States transported by rakes from the railways loading points in the State of Assam. It is submitted that only to prevent the transportation of Assam coal along with the coal procured from the other States, a verification of the documents/ transit passes was mandated vide the communication dated 10-02-2022. It is submitted that vide the said communication, the respondent No. 3 had in no manner questioned the documents including the transit passes issued by the competent authorities in the State of Nagaland and the State of Meghalaya and it only intended to verify as to whether along with the coals procured from the States of Nagaland and Meghalaya transported by Railways, coal of Assam origin were also being so transported. It is submitted that only documents submitted by the intending transporters of coal to the Railways is to be verified by the respondent No. 3 and if from the documents or the transit passes, no coal of Assam origin is found to be so transported, no objection would be issued by the respondent No. 3 jointly with the Directorate of Geology and Mining. In view of the above premises, it is submitted by Mr. Sharmah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 that the said communication dated 10-02-2022 being issued only to prevent unauthorized transportation of Assam origin coal, the same would not mandate an interference from this Court. 8. In view of the above premises, it is submitted by Mr. Sharmah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 that the said communication dated 10-02-2022 being issued only to prevent unauthorized transportation of Assam origin coal, the same would not mandate an interference from this Court. 8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 9. The challenge in the above noted writ petitions being to the communication dated 10-02-2022, the same being relevant is extracted hereinbelow: 10. A perusal of the said communication dated 10-02-2022 would reveal that the Managing Director of the respondent No. 3 Corporation, had projected that the respondent No. 3 was the only Govt. agency under the Mines and Mineral Department, Govt. of Assam involved in the sale of coal and accordingly requested the Railway authorities that the transit permits/ supporting documents/ papers submitted by the intending coal transporters, be forwarded to the office of the Managing Director of the respondent No. 3/ Corporation for verification and issue of NOC jointly by the respondent No. 3 and the Directorate of Geology and Mining, Assam before transportation of coal by rail rake from any railway station in the State of Assam. The materials brought on record as well as the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties reveal that the petitioners in the above noted writ petitions have procured coal which they seek to transport through Railway to various other States in the country, from the States of Nagaland and Meghalaya, after complying with the requirements for such procurement as existing in the States of Nagaland and Meghalaya. It is also evident from the materials available on record that before registering a intent from transportation of coal by Railways rakes, the Railway authorities mandatorily require the intending tenderer to furnish certain specified documents. The Railway authority upon perusing the said documents draw satisfaction with regard to the genuineness of the coal sought to be transported through Railways. It is only on genuineness of intents placed that the railway permits the transportation of the coal to the various other States of the country by placing rakes for the purpose. 11. Article 301 of the Constitution of India mandates for freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India. It is only on genuineness of intents placed that the railway permits the transportation of the coal to the various other States of the country by placing rakes for the purpose. 11. Article 301 of the Constitution of India mandates for freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India. Article 302 mandates that it is only the Parliament which may by law impose such restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse between one State and another or within any part of the territory of India as may be required in the public interest. Further Article 304 mandates that the legislature of a State made by law impose such reasonable restriction on the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse with or within that State as may be required in public interest. 12. The requirements placed upon the railways by the respondent No. 3 by the communication dated 10-02-2022 in the considered view of this Court places an unreasonable restriction on the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse between the States. As noticed, hereinabove, the petitioners have projected that they have procured coal from the States of Meghalaya and Nagaland after complying with all requisite provisions of law as existing in the said States and the coal so procured along with all valid documents are sent by road to the State of Assam, for transportation from various Railway heads in the State of Assam for transportation therefrom to various other States in the country by way of Railway rakes. Materials brought on record including the written instructions furnished by Mr. Sharmah, received from the respondent No. 3 does not in any manner indicate that the documents as furnished by the petitioners for transportation of coal procured from the States of Nagaland and Meghalaya are suspected to be not genuine. The only reason assigned by the respondent No. 3 for issuance of the communication dated 10-02-2022 is that along with the coal procured from the States of Meghalaya and Nagaland transported from the various Railway heads in the State of Assam to various other States of the country, Assam origin coal procured from the respondent No. 3 is also included. The only reason assigned by the respondent No. 3 for issuance of the communication dated 10-02-2022 is that along with the coal procured from the States of Meghalaya and Nagaland transported from the various Railway heads in the State of Assam to various other States of the country, Assam origin coal procured from the respondent No. 3 is also included. Accordingly, it is projected that it is only to verify the genuineness of the transit passes produced by the intending tenderers of Assam origin coal procured from the respondent No. 3, that the said communication dated 10-02-2022 was so issued. Given the said stand taken by the respondent No. 3 before this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the stipulation as contained in the communication dated 10-02-2022 could not have also been made applicable to the coal transported by the Railways on intents placed by the coal transporters who had procured such coals from the States of Nagaland and Meghalaya. 13. The restrictions now sought to be imposed on trade, commerce and intercourse between the States by the respondent No. 3, which is only an autonomous body under the Govt. of Assam, is in violation of Article 304(b) of the Constitution of India. Article 304(b) of the Constitution of India having laid down that it is only the Legislature of a State which may by law impose such reasonable restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse with or within that State as may be required in the public interest, such restrictions could not be placed for any reason by the respondent No. 3. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the stipulation as contained in the communication dated 10-02-2022 is clearly not sustainable. 14. The respondent No. 3 could not have required the Railway authorities to hold up the transportation of coals basing on intents by various coal traders including the petitioners in the above noted writ petitions who had placed the said intent for coal, which admittedly were procured from the States other than the State of Assam. This Court is of the considered view that the stipulations made in the communication dated 10-02-2022 amounts to an unreasonable restriction on the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse as set out in the Constitution of India. 15. This Court is of the considered view that the stipulations made in the communication dated 10-02-2022 amounts to an unreasonable restriction on the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse as set out in the Constitution of India. 15. In view of the above discussions, this Court is of the considered view that the communication dated 10-02-2022 would not be sustainable and accordingly, the same is set aside. The setting aside of the communication dated 10-02-2022 would not prevent the respondent No. 3 to put in place measures for protection of its interest with regard to the transportation of Assam origin coal by putting in place provisions in strict accordance with law holding the field. 16. With the above observations and directions, the above noted writ petitions stand disposed of.