1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

INDIA

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Writ Petition (CRL.) of 2012

IN THE MATTER OF

Manohar Lal Sharma Advocate

S.C.B.L.No.-1

Supreme court of India

New Delhi-01

Resident of , 31, Gyangudery

Vrindaben Mathura , U.P. Petitioner

VERSUS

1. The principle secretary

Prime minister office

Race court road

New Delhi-1

2. UNION OF INDIA

Through secretary

The Ministry of coal

Shastry Bhavan , New Delhi

3. Central Bureau of Investigation

Through Director

Plot no.5-B , 6th floor ,

CGO Complex

Lodhi Road New Delhi 11,0003

4. Mr. Manmohan Singh

At present Prime minister of India

Race course road , New Delhi.

5. Mr. Sriprakas Jaiswal

At present Coal minister of India

Ministry of coal

Shastry Bhavan , New Delhi-1

2

6. Indian national Congress

Through President

24 Akbar road , New Delhi

7. VEDANTA Resources PLC.

Through Managing director

registered office at 2nd Floor,

Vintners Place, 68 Upper Thames Street,

London EC4V 3BJ United Kingdom.

India office at

Vedanta House

75 Nehru Road, Vile Parle East,

Mumbai 400099 India Respondents

Writ petition (PIL) U/Art. 32 of the

constitution of India r.w. s.409 of IPC , PC

ACT-92 and FCRA Act 2010.

To,The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India

And His Companion Judges of

The Supreme Court of India.

The Petitioner most respectfully

Showeth:

1. That Petitioner, citizen of India & by profession an

advocate practicing at above address , is filing the

present writ petition (PIL) under Art.32 of the

constitution of India read with 406 & 409 of IPC &

Prevention of Corruption Act-92 for the protection of

the public properties and in the interest of the

general public & seeking quashing of allotment of

coal block, being unconstitutional and arbitrary as

well as undervalued created huge loss to the public

3

exchequer to the tune of Rs.1.60 lakhs crores that is

also contra to the cabinet decision.

8. That Petitioner has not approached to the

respondents in this regards.

9. That Petitioner is filing the present petition to decide

following constitutional question of law;-

a. Whether the Government has the right to

alienate, transfer or distribute natural

resources/national assets otherwise than by

following a fair and transparent method

consistent with the fundamentals of the

equality clause enshrined in the

Constitution?

b. Whether impugned allotments, contrary to

the MMDR Act 1957, recommendation &

approval by the coal secretary, Ministry of

state, planning commission and cabinet

(GOM), are not illegal, void ,

unconstitutional and arbitrary?

c. Whether central government means a prime

minister or minister of Union of India?

d. Whether undervaluing public property for

favouring private companies does not

attract PC Act-92?

e. Whether taking donation , directly

/indirectly, from allottee’s companies for

favoring them is a bribe or not for

4

prosecution?

f. Whether donation from NRI contra to the

FCRA act 2010 is an offence or not for

prosecution of the person concerned i.e.

political party’s president as well as its

office bearers?

10. That petitioner is challenging impugned actions

of the Respondents , i.e. Shri Manmohan Singh, prime

minister of India , Sriprakas jaiswal , Coal minister of

India and president of Congress party and its office

bearers who are controlling the executive office of the

Union of India as a ruling party, for allotment of 194

coal block to private companies under pick and

choose manner favouring them undervaluing public

properties just free of cost creating a huge loss about

1.64 lakhs crores to the country within the CAG

report filed in the parliament on 16th August 2012.

11. That petitioner is also challenging donation

given by foreign company Vedanta and received by

the Indian political parties including ruling party All

India Congress party, for favouring them in allotment

of natural resources and others, and seeking enquiry

for proper prosecution being an offence under FCRA

Act 2010.

12. That Petitioner is further under apprehension

that impugned coal allotment has been conducted in

5

exchange of money and bribes which is also liable to

be inquired in the interest of the general public.

13. That petitioner is challenging respondents

action for allotment of 194 coal block to private

companies at free of cost. Even no notional cost/

amount has been taken. During 2004 till march 2011

respondents no.2 & 3 allotted 194 coal blocks in (1)

Jharkhand, (2) Chattisgarh , (3) Maharastra (4) West

Bengal (5) Orissa and (6) Madhya Pradesh in

arbitrary manner favouring them against the public &

National interest by way of securing undue

advantages from them. Major private sector

beneficiaries / allottees are as follow:-

1. Abhijeet Infrastructure Ltd.

2. Usha Martin Ltd.

3. Neelanchal Iron & Power Generation

4. Bajrang Ispat

5. Bhusan Steel & Strips Ltd,

6. Electrosteel Casting

7. Essar Power Generation Ltd,

8. Rungta Mines Ltd.

9. Essex Power Ltd.

10. Hindalco

11. TATA Power Ltd,

12. Tata steel ltd.

13. DB Power Ltd

14. Adam Power Ltd

15. Monnet Ispat &

6

16. Energy Ltd,

17. Jindal Photo Ltd.

18. ( JSPL) Jindal steel Power ltd.

19. Gagan Sponge Iron Ltd

20. SKS Ispat & Power Ltd.

21. Prakash Industries

22. Himanchal EMTA

23. JSW Steel Ltd.

24. Adhunik thermal energy Ltd.

25. Strategic energy tech. Systems Ltd.

26. Mukund Ltd.

27. VIni Iron & Steel Udyog Ltd

28. Bhusan Steel & Power,

29. Jai Balaji

30. BALCO

31. Tata spong

32. Birla corpo. Ltd.

33. Grasim Industries

34. Electrotherm India Ltd.

35. Jayaswal Neco Ltd.

36. Topworth Urja & Metals Ltd.

37. Corporate Ispal & Alloys Ltd

38. Chhattisgarh Captive Coal Win:Ling Ltd.

39. (JVC of Ispat

40. Crodavari

41. Madanpur South (J VC of Hindustan Zinc Ltd.)

42. JLD Yavatmal Energy

43. R.K.M. Powergen

7

44. Bihar Sppong Iron Co. Ltd.

45. Kohinoor steels Pvt. Ltd.

46. IST Steel & Power,

47. Gujarat Ambuja Cements,

48. Lafarg India Ltd.

49. Domco smokless fuels Pvt ltd.

50. Essar power ltd.

51. AES chattisgarh Energy Pvt ltd.

52. Arcelor Mittal India Ltd.

53. GVK powers

54. Sterlite energy

55. GMR Energy

56. Lanco group

57. Reliance energy

14. That GMR , GVK companies are also belong to above

list favoured for coal block allotment. Lanco Group and a

host of small to medium players also figure in the

list. Petitioner is filing application for calling complete list

with address along with this application for further

necessary action. True copy of the list of coal block

allotments to the private companies couple with CAG report

dt. 7th May 2012 is being filed as Annexure P-1 ( 34-85

)

15. That Dr. Manmohan Singh , being as a prime

minister of India, is also having control and power to

effect working of the C.B.I. as well as CVC office who is

silent in the so called coal block allotment enquiry since

last one year.

8

16. That Dr. Manmohan Singh is the Prime Minister

since May 2004 and was personally in-charge of the Coal

Ministry from November 2006 to May 2009. During his

tenure Dr. Manmohan Singh did coal block allotment to

private companies from 2005 till 2009 as per his own

wish.

17. Mr. Sriprakash Jaiswal took charge of the coal

portfolio in May 2009. According to the CAG report MOC

allotted coal mines to 6 private companies as follow:-

a. Tata Steel Ltd. Jharkhand 28 May

2009

b. Aadhunik Thermal Energy Ltd. Jharkhand 28

May 2009

c. Himanchal EMTA W.Bengal 10 July

2009

d. JSW Steel Ltd. W. Bengal 10 July

2009

e. Jindal steel & Power Ltd. Orissa

27 Feb 2009

f. Rungta Mines Ltd. Jharkhand 28

May 2009

g. Kohinoor Steel Pvt Ltd. ,, 28 May

2009

h. IST Steel and power Chattisgarh

17 Jun 2009

i. Gujrat Ambuja Cement Chattisgarh 17

Jun 2009

j. Lafarge India Ltd. Chattisgarh

17 Jun 2009

18. That during 2004 till 2010 year-wise allocation of

captive coal blocks to the Government companies, private

9

companies and Ultra Mega Power Projects (UMPPs) as on

31 March 2011 are given in table below.

YEAR-WISE ALLOCATION OF COAL BLOCKS FOR

CAPTIVE MINING

Year ofAllocation

I Govt. Companies

Private Companies

Ultra Mega Power

Total

No. ofBlocks

GR (inmilliontonne)

No. ofBlocks

GR (inmilliontonne)

No. ofBlocks

GR (inmilliontonne)

No. ofBlocks

GR (inmilliontonne)

1993 to

200529 6294.72 41 3336.88 0 0 70 9631.60

2006 32 12363.15 15 3793.14 6 1635.24 53 17791.53

2007 34 8779.08 17 2111.14 1 972 52 11862.22

2008 3 509.99 20 2939.53 1 100 24 3549.52

2009 1 337 12 5216.53 3 1339.02 16 6892.55

2010 1 800.00 1800.00

Total 9928283.9

4105

17397.22

12 4846.26 21650527.4

2

19. That total 216 coal block has been allotted during

2004 till 2011. Out of the above 216 blocks, 24 blocks

were de-allocated (three blocks in 2003, two blocks in

2006, one block in 2008, one block in 2009, three blocks

in 2010 and 14 allocated blocks were subsequently re-

allocated (2003 and 2005) to others. Net 194 coal blocks,

with aggregate geological reserves of 44,440 million

tonne, stood allocated fresh as of 31 March 2011.

20. That impugned allotment of coal blocks has been

allocated with “underlying condition of political funding of

the party in power,” indicating that mining licences were

given on assurance that private parties would fund the

ruling UPA. For this PMO & COM adopted pick and

choose as per their choice and allotted coal mines free of

cost to the private companies.

10

21. That upon test check of file/ documents maintained

by MOC in respect of Fatehpur and Rampia (SE, dip side

of Rampia by audit in April, 2012 it is revealed to CAG

that:

a. In case of Fatehpur coal block, 69 applications were

received against the advertisement for allocation

of coal blocks. Out of these 69 applicants only

36 applicants were scheduled for making

presentation before the Screening Committee.

i. The Screening Committee recommended only

S K S Ispat & Power Limited and Prakash

Industries Limited for allocation of Fatehpur

coal block.

b. In case of Rampia and dip side of Rampia coal block,

108 (67-41) applications were received against the

advertisement for allocation of coal blocks. Out of

these 108 applicants only 2 applicants were

scheduled for making presentation before the

Screening Committee.

i. The Screening Committee, however,

recommended six companies (viz. Sterlite

Energy Limited, GMR Energy Limited, Lanco

Group Limited, Navbharat Power Limited,

Tvrittal Steel India Limited and Reliance

Energy Limited) for allocation of Rampia and

Dip side of Rampia coal blocks.

22. That Sterlite Energy ltd belongs to Anil

11

Agarwal’s VEDANTA group and PMO has allotted on

17th Jan 2008 coal block at dip side of Rampia at

Orissa and another coal block at Rampia.

23. That BALCO is also belong to Anil Agarwal

group to whome PMO has allotted on 6th Nov, 2007

coal block Durgapur II and Taraimar coal blocks At

Chattisgarh.

24. That Anil Agrawal Chairman of Vedanta Resources

plc , a foreign company having registered office at United

Kingdom, had declared in its annual report and press

about donation to Indian political parties, about Rs. 28

crores during last three years. None of the political

parties including National Congress Party disclosed about

such donation in their declaration before EC or have any

permission under FCRA Act.. True copy of the times of

India dt. 26.8.2012 couple with true copy of the relevant

page of Vedanta’s annual report of 2012 are being filed as

ANNEXURE P-2 colly. ( 86-88)

25.That allotment to S.K.S Ispat and power and M/s

Prakash Industy at fatehpur block at Chattisgarh

were done on 6.2.2006 under PM direction due to

request letter dt. 5.2.2006 issued by Subhiodh Kant

Sahai , then minister of state for food processing

Industry. Subhod kant’s brother was one of the

director of SKS Ispat and he was also present in 36

screening committee meeting dt.7.2.2006 for

securing his interest.

12

26.That impugned allotments were done without having

mining plan , forest & other clearances required

under MMDR Act.

27.That manner in which exercise to grant the coal

block to the impugned allottee private companies

leave no room for doubt that every thing was

managed to provide coal block free of cost to

impugned allottees under corruption discarding law

and rule as well as decided principles of auction

specially then auction rule has been framed and

amended law also has been put forward in

parliament.

28.The Ministry of Coal (MOC) has the overall

responsibility of framing policies and strategies for

exploration and development of coal reserves. It also

lays down general guidelines for productions supply

and distribution of coal.

29.The Coal Controller's Organisation (CCO) is a

subordinate office of MOC having its headquarters at

Kolkata. The CCO discharges various statutory

functions such as inspection of collieries for

ensuring class, grade and size of coal, adjudicating

claims of consumers on grade and size of coal;

collection and publication of statistical information

on coat and to grant opening/ reopening of coal

mines. In 2005, MOC appointed CCO as the nodal

13

agency for monitoring the production of coal

blocks allocated for captive mining.

30.Dr. Manmohan Singh is the Prime Minister since May

2004 and was personally in-charge of the Coal Ministry

from November 2006 to May 2009. Under his watch a

major coal allocation scam took place which allowed

private firms to make windfall gains, as is clear from the

facts that are now out in the public domain and the report

of the CAG.

31.That Under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act

1973, coal mining was exclusively reserved for the

public sector. However, Coal Mines

(Nationalisation) Amendment Act, 1976 allowed the

following exceptions to the above policy:

a. Captive mining by private companies engaged in

production of iron and steel, and

b. Sub lease for coal mining to private parties in

isolated small pockets not amenable to

economic development and not requiring rail

transport,

32. In July 1992, Government of India constituted a

Screening Committees for screening proposals

received for captive mining by the private power

generation companies.

33.That process was carried further by another

amendment to the Coal Mines (Nationalisation)

Amendment At in 1993 which allowed coal mining for

captive consumption for power generation and

14

other end uses to be notified by the Government

from time to time. Thus, mining of coal by Indian

private companies was allowed in phases for their

end use in iron and steel project, generation of

power, and cement production.

34.The government of India framed (1993) the

guidelines for allocation of coal blocks which, in order

to improve the system and bring transparency for

deciding the inter se priority amongst the

competing applicants, were modified by the MOC in

2005, 2006 and 2008. Brief of these guidelines is

given below:

a. MOC in consultation with public sector coal

companies would identify and prepare a list of

such coal blocks for allocation,

b. From the blocks so identified, MOC would

invite applications for a few blocks at a time

through advertisements in important national

and regional newspapers.

c. For allocation under Government

dispensation, the list of identified blocks

would be circulated inviting applications from

the concerned Government companies.

d. These applications would be scrutinised by a

Screening Committee under the Chairmanship

of Secretary (Coal) and recommended for

allocation of the blocks.

15

35. In December, 2004 GOI constituted an

Expert Committee on Road Map for Coal S e c t o r

R e f o r m s ( E x p e r t Committee) headed by Shri T. L

Sankar, Chairman., Energy Group Administrative

Staff College of India to prepare a comprehensive

roadmap for modernisation of the c o a l s e c t o r .

a. That in the 10th Plan and thereafter, the

number of applicants for coal blocks

increased as compared to the availability of

blocks due to increased demand of coal in the

country. There was an urgent need to bring in

a process of selection that was not only

objective but also demonstrably transparent.

Allocation through competitive bidding was

considered as one such acceptable selection

process.

b. The average allotment of coal blocks was 3-4 per

year until a few years back. But this number shot up

drastically to 22-24 during 2006-09 when Dr. Singh

was in charge, raising questions about the manner

in which these allotments were made. All the

allotments were made without transparency, without

protecting the interest of public exchequer, and

without any competitive process.

c. A comprehensive note on competitive bidding for the

allocation of coal blocks was given by the Coal

Secretary to the Minister of State for Coal on 16 July

2004. It noted the substantial difference between

16

the price of coal supplied by Coal India Limited

(CIL) and the cost of coal produced through captive

mining. This ensured a "windfall gain" to the party

which was allocated a captive block. That same

month, the Minister of State sought clarification on

what he feared would be "likely opposition from the

power sector". The Coal Secretary was explicit that

the existing system of allocation, even with

modifications, would not be able to achieve the

objectives of revenue maximisation, transparency

and objectivity in the allocation process.

d. However, rather than accept this advice, in

September 2004, the PMO forwarded a note

detailing what it claimed were certain disadvantages

of the proposed system. Subsequently, the Coal

Secretary remarked that "there was hardly any

merit in the objections raised" by the PMO.

e. The secretary also highlighted some of the "pulls

and pressures" experienced by the screening

committee during the decision making process and

stressed that all pending applications were

recommended on the basis of competitive bidding,

and that allocations should be made on such a basis.

This recommendation was ignored by the PMO.

36.In October 2004, the MoS ( minister of state) again argued

that the proposal for competitive bidding may not be

pursued as the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Amendment

Bill 2000 was pending in the Rajya Sabha with stiff

opposition from trade unions. He also disagreed with the

17

opinion that the screening committee could not ensure

transparent decision making. He said that this was "not an

adequate ground for switching over (to) a new

mechanism".

a. The matter was once again put before the PMO,

after which, 28 June 2004 was decided as the cut-off

date for considering applications as per the current

policy rather than the proposed policy.

37.In March 2005, the Coal Secretary again put up a note to

the PM stating that if the revised system was not put in

place quickly enough, pressure would again mount on the

government for continuing with the existing procedure.

Subsequently, the PMO in August 2005 asked the coal

ministry to amend the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act

1973 before the new system became operational. "Since

this was likely to take considerable time it was decided

that the coal ministry would continue to allot coal blocks

for captive mining through extant screening committee

procedure till the new competitive bidding procedure

became operational," the note states. Again in November

2005, the MoS said that the PMO had taken a view to

amend the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, which was a

"time consuming exercise and as such allowed the

department to proceed with the existing system" ... "there

was no immediacy..."

38.In April 2006, it was decided to amend the MMDR Act so

that the system of competitive bidding could be made

applicable to all minerals. Later on, delaying the matter

further, the MoS opined that the issue of amendment

18

should be "revisited" as it had the potential to become

controversial.

39.Finally, the bill to amend the MMDR Act was introduced in

Parliament in October 2008 and passed in August 2010.

40.While the amendment to ensure coal allocation by auction

remained in abeyance because of the Dr. Singh’s

interventions as head of the Cabinet and in-charge of the

coal ministry, 24 blocks were allocated in 2005, 53 in

2006, 52 in 2007, 24 in 2008 and 16 in 2009.

Interestingly, post amendments, only one coal block was

allocated in 2010, and not even one in 2011.

41. There was a rush for coal blocks allocated under the old,

noncompetitive, system. As on June 2004, only 39 coal

blocks stood allocated.

a. "But since July 2004, 155 coal blocks were allocated

to government and private parties following the

existing process. The CAG in its draft report has

pegged the losses running in lakhs of crores.

42.The CAG draft report remarked that steps could have been

taken to allocate coal blocks through competitive bidding

well in September 2004 itself.

43.Till March 2011, the MOC has allocated 194 coal

blocks (net 44,440 million tonnes) for captive mining

of which 142 were explored blocks (GR: 23,39]

million tonne) and the balance 52 were either

regionally explored or unexplored coal blocks (GR:

21,049 million tones).

19

44. The concept of allotment through competitive

bidding was first made public by the Government

on 28 June 2004. Further, sequence of events in

this regard till 2012 is indicated below:

28.06.2004 The concept of allocation of captive

coal blocks through competitive

bidding was first made public.

16.07.2004 Comprehensive note on

'Competitive Bidding for allocation

of coal blocks' placed by then

Secretary (Coal) to MoS (Coal and

Mines), mentioning that "since

there is a substantial difference

between price of coal supplied by

Coal India and coal produced

through captive mining, there is a

windfall gain to the person who is

allotted a captive block.. "The note

further indicated that " the bidding

system will only tap part of the

windfall profit for the public

purposes."

30.07.2004 Secretary (Coal) mentioned that

the present system of allocation in

the changed scenario, even with

modifications would not be able to

achieve the objectives of

20

transparency and objectivity in the

allocation process.

20.08.2004 Minister (Coal and Mines) directed

that a draft Cabinet Note be

prepared for placing the same

before the Cabinet for

consideration and decision.

11.09.2004 A note was initiated from the PM0

detailing certain disadvantages of

allocation of coal blocks through

competitive bidding.

2`5.09.200

4

In response, Secretary (Coal)

submitted draft Cabinet Note to

MoS with the remarks that there

was hardly any merit in the

objections raised. Different kinds

of pulls and pressures experienced

by the Screening Committee

during the decision-making process

was also highlighted. The note

stressed on the desirability of

taking decision in respect of all

pending applications on the basis

of competitive bidding.

4.10.2004 MoS stated that the proposal for

competitive bidding may not be

pursued further as it would invite

further delay in the allocation of

21

blocks, considering that the Coal

Mines (Nationalisation)

Amendment till 2000 envisaging

competitive bidding as a selection

process for allocation of blocks for

commercial purposes was pending

in the Rajya Sabha with stiff

opposition from Trade Unions and

others concerned. MoS disagreed

with the views that the Screening

Committee could not ensure

transparent decision-making and

added that this alone was not an

adequate ground for switching

over to a new mechanism.

15.10.2004 Secretary (Coal) stated that the

policy of allotment of coal blocks

through competitive bidding was

discussed in the PM0 and it was

felt that since a number of

applicants requested for allotment

of blocks based on the current

policy, it would not be appropriate

to change the allotment policy

through competitive bidding in

respect of applications received on

the basis of existing policy,

22

Accordingly, the policy of allotment

through competitive bidding could

be made prospective and pending

applications might be decided on

the basis of the existing policy.

Therefore, the cut-off date for

considering applications as per the

current policy and the proposed

revised policy was taken as 28 Jun

2004.

1.11.2004 The PMO directed Secretary (Coal)

to amend the draft Cabinet Note

for approval of the Minister (Coal

and Mines) after taking into

account the following:

1. the cut-off date for competitive

bidding.

2. the fact that the MOC had

already moved the Coal Mines.

(Nationalisation) amendment

Bill 2000 envisaging

commercial purposes.

3. the change in the policy of

allocation of coal blocks for

captive mining will be made

effective prospectively.

4. The PMO stated “the change in

23

the policy of allocation of coal

blocks for captive mining will be

made effective prospectively.

Therefore, there is no urgency in

the matter. Accordingly, there is

no need to bring in the required

amendment in the Coal Mines

(Nationalisation) Act through an

Ordinance. It would be

appropriate to bring in the

required amendment through a

Bill to be moved in the coming

Parliament Session.”

25.02.2005 On resubmission (23 December

2004) of the revised draft Cabinet

Note, Minister (Coal) opined that

he was in complete agreement with

the views expressed by MoS in his

note dated 04 October 2004 and as

such the proposal need not be

proceeded further.

7.03.2005 The Secretary (Coal) put up a note

for approval of the Draft Cabinet

Note to the Minister (Coal) ,

stating that decision on all

applications received as on 28 June

2004 would have been taken by the

24

end of March 2005 and if the

revised procedure for allocation of

coal blocks was not put in place

quickly enough, pressures would

again mount on the Government

for continuing with the present

procedure, which might not be

desirable in the interests of

bringing about total transparency

in allocation of coal blocks.

16.03.2005 The PM0 communicated that the

draft Cabinet Note be updated and

sent back urgently,

24.03.2005 The PM0 communicated the

approval or the updated draft

Cabinet Note by the Minister (Coal)

21.06.2005 The draft Cabinet Note

incorporating the views of various

States and comments of the

Ministries and Departments with

the observations of the Minister of

Coal was placed by the Secretary

(Coal) before the MoS for approval

of the Minister (Coal), stating that

it was desirable that decision on

allocation of captive block through

bidding route was taken at the

25

earliest so that the process of

allocation of coal blocks could

continue unhindered.

4.07.2005 MoS in his note to the Minister

(Coal), inter alia, stated that the

implications of such a decision by

the Cabinet needed to be

considered in great detail and that

there was a general reluctance on

the part of power utilities to

participate in the competitive

bidding due to cost implications.

25.07.2005 A meeting was taken by the PM0

wherein it was decided that MOC

would amend the Cabinet Note to

take into account the concerns of

the State Governments, where the

coal blocks were located. The Coal

Mines Nationalisation) Act, 1973

would need to be amended before

the proposed competitive bidding

became operational. Since this was

likely to take considerable time, it

was decided that MOC would

continue to allot coal blocks for

captive mining through the extant

Screening Committee procedure till

26

the new competitive bidding

procedure became operational, hi

the meeting, Secretary (Coal)

stated that" the competitive

bidding procedure will only tap part

of the windfall profit that accrued

to the companies which were

allocated captive coal blocks under

the Screening Committee

procedure for public purposes."

9.08.2005 The PM0 requested MOC to take

urgent action as per the decisions

taken in the meeting held on 25 July

2005.

12.01.2006 MoS stated that the PMO had

taken a view to amend the Coal

Mines (Nationalisation) Act which

was a time consuming exercise and

as such allowed the Department to

proceed with the allocation of

captive coal blocks under the

extant mechanism. MoS stated that

"several applications were

received in respect of coal and

lignite blocks already put on

offer and which were under

process and as such there was

27

no immediacy in the matter

and that the Note be

resubmitted at an appropriate

time keeping in view the

issues involved".

7.02.2006 Secretary (Coal) submitted a note

to the Minister (Coal) through

MoS, stating that the PM0 had

been pressing for expeditious

submission of the Cabinet Note,

The matter was seen by the

Minister (Coal) on 07 March 2006.

16.01.2006 Secretary (Coal) approved the

submission of the final note to the

Cabinet Secretariat.

7.04.2006 A meeting was held in the PM()

wherein it was generally felt that it

would be more appropriate to make

an amendment in the Mines and

Minerals (Development and

Regulation) Act, (IVIMDR Act) 1957

so that the system of competitive

bidding could be made applicable to

all minerals covered under the said

Act.

20.04.2006 Secretary (Coal) approved a draft

note to the Ministry of Mines with a

request to obtain the comments of

28

the Department of Legal Affairs on

the legal feasibility of the proposed

amendment to the IVIMDR Act,

1957 to address competitive

bidding.

27.04.2006 MoS opined that the issue to

amend the MMDR Act should be

revisited, as it involved

withdrawing the current powers of

the State Governments and it bad

the potential to become a

controversial issue.

Minister of Coal stated that the

views expressed by the MoS were

appropriate and MOC should

refrain from making suggestions

which had implications for federal

polity.

2.05.2006 The advice of the Minister (Coal)

was sent to the Ivlinistry of Mines

to suggest appropriate

modifications in the tentative draft.

The draft with the suggestions of

the Ministry of Mines was referred

to the Ministry of Law and Justice,

Department of Legal Affairs for

their views on the legal feasibility

29

of the proposed amendment.

15.09.2006 MOC communicated to the PMO

and the Cabinet Secretariat that the

Ministry of Law and Justice has

advised MOC to initiate suitable

measures for amendment of the

MMDR Act, 1957 for addressing the

Competitive Bidding,

17.10.2008 A Bill to amend the MMDR Act,

1957 was introduced in the

Parliament by the Ministry of

Mines.

31.10.2008 The Amendment Bill was referred

to the Standing Committee on Coal

and Steel for examination and

report.

19.02.2009 The Standing Committee submitted

its report to the Parliament and

made certain recommendations.

10.08.2009 MoS held a meeting with the State

Ministers of Mining and Geology of

coal and lignite bearing States.

18.02.2010 The Minister (Mines) moved the

motion for passage of the MMDR

Amendment Bill, 2008 in the

Budget Session of Parliament

(2010) after the Cabinet approved

30

(28 January 2010) the Cabinet Note.

9.09.2010 The MMDR Amendment Act, 2010

was notified in the Gazette of India

(Extraordinary) after the same was

passed by both the Houses of the

Parliament in the Monsoon Session

(26 July 2010 to 31 August 2010).

22.09.2010 The Secretary (Coal) chaired a

meeting with the representatives

of the Ministries of Power, Mines,

Petroleum and Natural Gas, Steel,

Department of Industrial Policy

and Promotion and the Planning

Commission to discuss various

issues on finalisation of the

modalities for competitive bidding

as the selection process for

allocation of coal and lignite

blocks.

31.01.2011 Draft bid documents were discussed

in the meeting of the Committee.

45. That till March 2011 MOC has allocated 194 coal

blocks net ( 44,440 Million tonne ) for captive mining of

which 142 were explored block.

46. That as per CAG report in fact Government had

decided to bring in transparency and objectivity in

the allocation process of coal blocks, with 28 June 2004

taken as the cut-off date. This process kept getting

31

delayed at various stages. Even after a lapse of seven

years, the same is yet to materialize (February 2012).

As per the note of the Secretary (Coal), steps could have

been taken to allocate coal blocks through competitive

bidding as of September 2004.

47. MOC referred the matter of introduction of

competitive bidding process for allocation of coal blocks to

the Department of Legal Affairs (DLA) in June 2004 for

seeking an opinion whether coal blocks could be

allocated through auction/ competitive bidding route

by making rules -under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation)

Act, 1973 read with Mines and Minerals (Regulation and

Development) Act (MMDR Act), 1957 and Mineral

Concession Rules, 1960. After a series of correspondences

and after two years DLA stated (28 July 2006) that it was

open to the government to introduce the auctioning of

coal mining blocks for captive use through competitive

bidding as the selection process for allocation was

possible by amending the existing administrative

instructions and such a process could be governed by the

provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Thus,

competitive bidding could have been introduced in 2006

(as per the advice of DLA in July 2006). DLA also stated

that the course which was to be adopted in the instant

case, Le. to amend the Act or to effect changes in the

administrative instructions, was a matter of policy to be

decided by the referring Ministry. The same opinion

was reiterated by the Law Secretary also in August

2006.

32

48.That major player in power, Reliance Power, which

is setting up the Sasan and Tilayia ultra-mega power

projects (UMPPs), is missing from the list because the

section on "Windfall benefit to private companies"

does not include 12 coal blocks given for the

government's showpiece power projects as they were

allocated through a tariff-based competitive bidding

route. 

49. That The blocks given to Reliance Power are dealt

with in a separate section. CAG's estimate of the

"undue benefit" to Reliance Power for these two

projects is now placed at Rs 15,849 crore over a 25-

year period.) 

50.That Jindal Steel and Power Ltd promoter Naveen

Jindal responded to TIMES OF INDIA , saying:

a. "It is all project specific. Often you find (state-

run) companies unable to start work. I am proud

to say that JSPL has started two of our blocks

and is contributing towards creating wealth for

the country. For all these 155 blocks, Coal India

did not have any mining plans as it found them

unattractive... CAG may have its view but

whether it is JSPL or any other private company,

they are all Indian entities and are creating

wealth for the country." 

51.That allotment to the reliance group is due to earnest

& Young report who has been appointed as consultant

33

by the GOI

52.That CAG report has been placed in the parliament.

On 24th August 2012 finance minister , on the behest

of the Congress party declared that there is no mining

is started in the above said 155 allotted coal block

therefore there is no loss to the country.

53.That it is pertinent to say that concerned companies

share prices has been sharply fluctuated in the share

market and these companies secured maximum

benefits due to impugned allocations.

54. That the petition is being filed on the following

amongst other

GROUNDS

a. Because Hon’ble Supreme Court in judgment dt. 2nd

Feb 2012 in W.P. (C.) NO.10 of 2011 , Hon’ble

Justice G.S. Singhavi and Ashok Ganguly J , has

already decided above question of law pertaining to

2G spectrum allocation case declaring that natural

resources must be allotted via auction systems.

Hon’ble Supreme Court declared process &

allotment of the 2G spectrum as "unconstitutional

and arbitrary," and quashed all the 122 licenses

issued in 2008 by Telecom ministry..

b. Because State legally owns the natural resources on

behalf of citizens of India. Prime minister and coal

minister hold state office in trust. Respondent no.2

and 3 , knowingly and deliberately did impugned

allotment in arbitrary manner under choose and

pick method, favouring private parties. The way

34

Respondents has allotted coal bock to private

companies it has created huge loss about 1.84 lakhs

crores to the national consolidated fund of India. It

is a serious criminal breach of trust and is also

attracted PC Act-92.

c. Because impugned allotment process has been

carried out for 7 years just to secure proper funding

in political party account. Within declaration of

Vedanta’s Chairman Mr. Anil Agarwal pertaining to

Rs.28 crores donation to the Indian political parties

it is a subject matter of bribe for the allotment of

the coal mines and others resources. BALCO and

Sterlite energy ltd. belong to Anil Agarwal’s group of

the compnaies. Sterlite energy ltd belong to

VEDANTA itself who had donated Rs.28 crores. It is

a subject matter further to investigate amount of

donation to the ruling party in exchange of coal

block allotment and others for proper prosecutions.

d. Because within the above facts impugned allotment

of coal block to the private parties are outcome of

corruption and fraud therefore impugned allotments

are liable to be quashed with heavy cost couple with

further action.

e. Because within the above facts it is clearly shown

that Dr. Singh, PM & Sriprakash Jaiswal minister of

CoM abused their positions to give huge pecuniary

benefits to private parties, which is an offence under

Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Therefore the said matter needs a thorough

35

independent investigation.

f. Because respondent Dr. Manmohan Singh Prime

minister of India and Sriprakas Jaiswal, minister of

MoC , both belong to ruling congress party and as

per VEDANTA they had given donation to Indian

political parties. However name of the parties has

not disclosed. VEDANTA is an NRI firm and any

such fund from foreign company requires prior

permission from the ministry of home affairs.

Otherwise it is an offence under FCRA,2010 subject

to imprisonment for three years with penalty.

Therefore also subject matter of donation and its

effect in coal allotment must be inquired and

decided for legal action in the interest of general

public.

g. Because respondent no. 4, 5 & 6 did not declare to

ECI about impugned donation received from

VEDANTA what was mandatory u/s 29B & 29C of

the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951 and is a

serious offence.

h. Because u/s 19 of MMDR Act-1957 an allotment of

mining lease, in contravention of the provision of the

act, is void.

i. Because impugned coal block have been allotted

without previous approval of the central government

by the prime minister and coal minister contrary to

the provision of s.5 of The MMDR Act-1957.

j. Because impugned coal block has been allotted

without having mining plan in hand which is a

36

violation of s.5 (2)(b) of MMDR Act 1957. According

to the CAG report list more than 50 companies has

been allotted coal block in Jharkhand , Orissa &

Chattisgarh without having coal mining plan. It is a

serious case of violation of MMDR Act. Sterlite

energy and SKS Ispat Power Ltd are one of the

same companies.

k. Because for allotment of impugned coal block

provision of s.10 of the act was not complied & coal

block were allotted as per pick and choice basis for

benefitting to the private companies in exchange for

donations and others which is a serious violation of

law & also corruption attracting prevention of

corruption act -1992.Therefore these allotment must

be quashed with further prosecution under PC act-

92.

l. Because offence and activities has seriously

damaged National interest and properties.

Therefore CBI investigation must be within the

supervision of this Hon’ble High court and to file

their report before this court for complete justice.

55. That Petitioner has not filed any Petition before this

Hon’ble Supreme court or in any High court for the relief

prayed herein.

PRAYER

37

Therefore within the aforesaid facts and circumstances in the

interest of citizen of India for justice , equity and fair play this

Hon’ble court

1. Be pleased to declare and quash allotment of impugned

194 coal blocks in (1) Jharkhand, (2) Chattisgarh , (3)

Maharastra (4) West Bengal (5) Orissa and (6) Madhya

Pradesh to private companies/ parties , being as

arbitrary, illegal , unconstitutional and against the

public interest. AND

2. Be pleased to direct respondent no.3 to conduct

independent inquiry and to file their inquiry report

before this Hon’ble court for fixing the responsibility of

the respondents 4 to 5 and others in the impugned coal

allotment scam for proper prosecution u/s 409 & 420 of

IPC and PC ACT-92 & others. AND

3. Be pleased to issue direction for further inquiry under

FCRA ACT 2010 pertaining to donation from NRI

company, Vedanta, to Indian National Congress and to

file their report before this Hon’ble Court for further

action & proper prosecution. AND

4. Pass such other order or further orders, as this Hon’ble

court may deem fit and proper under the facts and

circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER AS

ARE DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAYS.

38

Drawn & settled by: Filed by: Manohar Lal Sharma

Advocate

Manohar Lal Sharma Advocate Petitioner-in-person

Drawn on : 27.8.2012

Filed on : 29.8.2012

39

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Writ Petition (Crl.) no. OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF

Manohar Lal Sharma Advocate Petitioner Versus

The principle secretary & Others

Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, Manohar Lal Sharma S/O Late Shri P.L. Sharma ,practicing

advocate presently practicing in Supreme Court at S.C.B.

Lib. No.-1 Supreme Court of India ,New Delhi, Petitioner

do hereby solemnly affirm, state and declares as under

1. That I am the petitioner in the above writ petition and as

such I am aware of the facts of this case and I am

competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That contents of this accompanied writ & contents of the

date of events ( page B- ) writ petition (para 1-55) and

(pages 1-32) and contents of the filed applications for stay

and directions are true and correct to the best of my

knowledge and belief.

3. That filed copy of the annexure P-1 & P-2 colly are true

and correct to their original.

Deponent

Verification

I , the above named deponent do hereby declare and

verify on oath that the contents of this affidavit are true

to my knowledge ,nothing material has been concealed

therefrom and no part of it is false. Verified at New

Delhi on this 28.8.2012

DEPONENT

40

INDEX

1. LISTING PROFROMA A-A1

2. DATE OF EVENTS B-D

3. Writ Petition with affidavit 1-33

4. Annexure P-1

True copy of the list of coal block

allotments to the private companies

couple with CAG report dt. 7th May

2012

34-85

5. Annexure-P2 Colly

True copy of the times of India news

report dt. 26.8.2012

True copy of the relevant page of

Vedanta’s annual report of 2012

86-87

88

6. I.A. no. OF 2012

Application for direction

89-90

7. I.A. no. OF 2012

Application for stay

91-92

8. True copy of identity card of the

petitioner