Coal supply under SHAKTI upheld on prima facie entitlement, with interim supply left undisturbed despite later administrative objection.

Continued coal supply under the SHAKTI framework was upheld where the record showed the petitioner remained treated as an LOA holder after conversion from GCPP to IPP, and the later administrative objection did not justify disturbing the interim arrangement. The Court found a prima facie case for assured coal linkage because the plant had been commissioned, LOA milestones had been met, and no formal communication had negated entitlement. The request to vacate the interim direction was rejected, and supply was directed to continue on the notified price on usual terms pending final decision.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the interim direction requiring coal supply to the petitioner should be vacated or recalled on the basis of the competent authority's later decision concerning the petitioner's conversion from GCPP to IPP; (ii) Whether the petitioner had prima facie satisfied the conditions for coal supply under the SHAKTI policy and was entitled to continued supply at the notified price.

Issue (i): Whether the interim direction requiring coal supply to the petitioner should be vacated or recalled on the basis of the competent authority's later decision concerning the petitioner's conversion from GCPP to IPP.

Analysis: The later administrative decision was examined against the earlier material, including communications showing that the petitioner continued to be treated as an LOA holder even after conversion to IPP. The record also showed that the conversion had been permitted with reference to public interest considerations and lower fuel cost for consumers. The asserted objection that the petitioner had bypassed other IPP applicants did not, on the material before the Court, justify disturbing the interim arrangement.

Conclusion: The request to vacate or recall the interim direction was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner had prima facie satisfied the conditions for coal supply under the SHAKTI policy and was entitled to continued supply at the notified price.

Analysis: The petitioner's plant was commissioned, milestones under the LOA had been met, and there was no demonstrated formal communication negating its entitlement to coal linkage merely because of the change from GCPP to IPP. The policy framework was read as supporting execution of an FSA for eligible pending LOA holders, and the Court found the petitioner to have a prima facie claim. The suggested alternative of spot or auction-based procurement was not treated as an adequate answer to the need for assured fuel supply in the interim.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held to have a prima facie entitlement to coal supply under the SHAKTI framework, and supply was to continue at the notified price on usual terms.

Final Conclusion: The applications to undo the earlier interim order failed, and the coal supply direction in favour of the petitioner was left undisturbed, with supply to continue on the stipulated commercial terms.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the record shows continued recognition of the petitioner's entitlement status and a prima facie case for assured fuel supply, a later administrative objection alone does not justify recalling an interim order granting coal supply pending final decision.

---