[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No. 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 13 March, 2026
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No. 1/5
GAHC010058112022
2026:GAU-AS:3701
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2396/2022
ZAWED IQBAL BARBHUIYA
(CONTRACTOR OF KATAKHAL SAND MINING CONTRACT UNIT NO. 02),
S/O- RAJAB ALI BARBHUIYA, R/O- VILL. RATANPUR PT-II, P.O. RATANPUR,
P.S. HAILAKANDI, DIST.- HAILAKANDI, PIN- 788151.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF
FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT, DISPUR, GHY.-06.
2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
ASSAM
PANJABARI
GUWAHATI.
3:THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
SOUTH ASSAM CIRCLE
SILCHAR
CACHAR.
4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF HAILAKANDI
HAILAKANDI.
5:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
HAILAKANDI DIVISION
HAILAKANDI.
6:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
ASSAM ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (AMTRON)
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE
BAMUNIMAIDAN
GUWAHATI- 781021
Page No. 2/5
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K NAIR, MISS B DAS,MR. T A CHOUDHURY,MR. A Y
CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FOREST
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 13.03.2026
Heard Mr. T.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. R.R. Gogoi, learned
Standing Counsel, Finance Department for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, & 5; and Mr. S.R.
Baruah, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent no. 4.
2. The learned counsel for the parties have referred to a Speaking Order dated
27.01.2022 passed by the respondent no. 2. The operative parts of the Speaking Order read
as under :-
ORDER :
In the light of the above observations and findings and after careful examination of all the
records and documents, it is found that the petitioner's prayer for relief of
compensation/remission/refund of kists money i.e. from 13th to 17th kist caused due to
pandemic from the original contract period cannot be considered. His further prayer to
allow him to continue the Katakhal Sand Mining Contract Unit No. 2 by depositing the
upcoming quarterly installment is unsustainable and cannot be considered as per the
provisions contained in the AMMC Rules, 2013 and further amendment upto 2021. The
contract stand terminated as per rule 38(6) of AMMC Rules, 2013 due to default in
payment of aforesaid kists.
The matter stands disposed accordingly.
3. Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Speaking
Order is silent as regards the matter of refund of the security deposit.
4. Mr. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department has submitted that with
regard to the matter of security deposit, the provision for its forfeiture or refund is governed
by sub-clause [vi] of sub-rule [7] of Rule 38 of the Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules,
2013.
5. Sub-rule [7] of the Rule 38 of the Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2013 has
provided as under :-
[7] Any default in payment of the due installments of dead rent, royalty, contract money,
contribution to the fund beyond a period of seven days from the due date would entail :
-
[i] Issue of a notice requiring the mineral concession holder to clear the default
immediately and stating that in case the due amount is not paid within a period of thirty
days of the due date, his mining operations would be suspended;
[ii] If the concession holder fails to deposit the due amount within a period of thirty days
of the due date alongwith interest applicable thereon, the competent authority shall
direct the concession holder to suspend his mining operations and stop any despatch
of mineral from the concession area till such time the default is cleared;
[iii] The order of suspension issued under [ii] above shall, inter alia, include a show-
cause notice for termination of the lease or contract of permit alongwith forfeiture of
security in the event of continuation of default for a period of thirty days from the date of
order of suspension. The concession holder shall also be liable to pay the dues for such
suspension period;
[iv] The competent authority may revoke the suspension of mining operations in case
the concession holder deposits atleast fifty percent of the due amount with an
undertaking to pay the balance amount within a period of three months alongwith
interest, concurrent with the installments payable during this period;
[v] The order of suspension of mining operations and the ban on despatch of mineral
from the area would remain in force throughout such default period;
[vi] The competent authority may terminate the mineral concession, with or without
forfeiture of the whole of the security deposit or part thereof, as deemed appropriate, in
such cases without any further opportunity.
6. From the provision of sub-rule [7] of Rule 38 of the Assam Minor Mineral Concession
Rules, 2013, it transpires that the Competent Authority while terminating a mineral
concession has to observe whether such termination is with or without forfeiture of the whole
of the security deposit or part thereof, as deemed appropriate.
7. The Speaking Order dated 27.01.2025 is apparently found silent in the matter of
forfeiture or refund of the security deposit, either in whole or in part.
8. In the above view of the matter, the respondent no. 2 is required to take a call as
regards refund or forfeiture of the security deposit, either wholly or partially, pursuant to
termination of the mineral concession, by taking into consideration the entire facts and
circumstances.
9. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to
take into consideration the matter of refund or forfeiture of whole of the security deposit or
part thereof, pursuant to the decision taken with regard to termination of the mineral
concession by the Speaking Order dated 27.01.2022 and thereafter, to pass a reasoned order.
To facilitate the such consideration, the petitioner is allowed to submit a Representation with
regard to his prayer for refund of the security deposit the petitioner had deposited for the
mineral concession granted to him in respect of Katakhal Sand Mining Contract Unit no. 2
within a period of two weeks from today. In the event the petitioner submits such
Representation, the respondent no. 2 shall consider such Representation and thereafter,
dispose of the same within a period one month from the date of receipt of such
Representation along with a certified copy of this Order from the petitioner, in terms of sub-
clause [vi] sub-rule [7] of Rule 38 of the Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2013, as
amended, and on its own merits.
10. This order disposes of the writ petition.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
