Orissa High Court
Shiv Dutt Sharma vs State Of Odisha And Anr on 7 February, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.13354 of 2014
Shiv Dutt Sharma .... Petitioner
Mr. Bigyan Ku. Sharma, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha and Anr. .... Opp. Parties
Mr. T.K. Pattnaik, ASC
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
MR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
ORDER
Order No. 07.02.2022
03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard Mr. Bigyan Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. T.K.Pattnaik, learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the
letter dated 29.05.2014 under Anmnexure-6 issued by the opposite
party no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira, by which fresh
demand has been raised against the petitioner for excess production
of mineral beyond the approved quantity i.e. Rs.62,76,61,252/- for
the period from 2000-01 to 2009-10.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier, letter
dated 20.10.2012 under Annexure-1 was issued by the opposite
party no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira for recovery under
Sub-Section (5) of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals
(Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 of the price of the mineral
raised without lawful authority in respect of Nuagaon Iron/ Mn.
Mines over an area of 12.942 hectors. Thereafter, the opposite party
no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira issued another letter i.e. letter
// 2 //
dated 14.11.2012 under Annexure-2 reiterating the claim made in
the earlier letter fixing to 19.11.2012 for hearing of the petitioner.
The petitioner made a request before the opposite party no.2-
Deputy Director of Mines, Koira vide his request letter dated
23.11.2012 under Annexure-3 for fixation of a date for his hearing.
Thereafter, the opposite party no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira
issued letter dated 10.01.2013 under Annexure-4 reiterating the
above said claim. Pursuant to such letter under Annexure-4, the
petitioner filed his reply under Annexure-5 before the opposite party
no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira. It is contended that without
considering the reply of the petitioner under Annexure-5 and
without giving opportunity of hearing, the demand letter dated
29.05.2014 under Annexure-6 has been issued by the opposite party
no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira and, therefore, the authority
has acted arbitrarily which is contrary to the provisions of law.
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State submits that in
view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case
of Common Cause -vrs. Union of India (Writ Petition (Civil)
No.114 of 2014 disposed of on 2nd of August, 2017), the petitioner is
liable to pay the aforesaid amount.
6. As it appears from the records, this Court while issuing notice in
the present case vide order dated 13.08.2014 passed an interim order
directing that letter dated 29.05.2014 (Annexure-6) issued by the
Deputy Director of Mines, I/C, Koira may not be enforced without
leave of this Court. Though seven years passed in the meantime, no
counter affidavit has been filed in this case. Learned Additional
Standing Counsel for the State has also no instructions with regard
to disposal of the reply filed by the petitioner under Annexure-5 in
response to Annexure-4.
// 3 //
7. In view of such position, the writ petition is disposed of
directing the opposite party no.2- Deputy Director of Mines, Koira
to pass appropriate order taking into account the reply under
Annexure-5 filed by the petitioner by giving opportunity of
hearing to all the parties within a period of thirty days hence.
8. The interim order passed earlier shall continue for a period of
thirty days from today.
9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(Dr. B.R. Sarangi)
Judge
( S.K. Panigrahi)
Judge
BJ
