Gauhati High Court
Jain Coal Traders And 12 Ors vs Coal India Ltd And 4 Ors on 8 May, 2019
Author: Ujjal Bhuyan
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010124112017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 1484/2017
1:JAIN COAL TRADERS and 12 ORS.
A PROPRIETORAL FIRM, REP. BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI NAVEEN
KUMAR MITTAL. AND HAVING ITS OFFICE AT H/N 136/138 SECTOR BD
NEAR SHIV MANDIR SWASS NAGAR, MANDI, GOVINGARH, PUNJAB.
2: AJAY TRADING CO.
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
REP. BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI NAVEEN KUMAR MITTAL. AND
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 24 HEMANT BOSE SARINI KOLKATA BRANCH
SAMBHAL MORADABAD
U.P.
3: M/S. MAA KAMAKHYA COKE INDUSTRIES
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT IIT COLLEGE ROAD
AMINGAON
GUWAHATI AND IS REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS PARTNER SRI VIPIN
SINGHAL.
4: MAHALAXMI MINING PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT N.H. 37
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI
AND IS REP. BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTOR SRI VIPIN SINGHAL.
5: MAHALAXMI CONTINENTAL LTD.
A COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT N.H. 37
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI
AND IS REP. BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTOR SRI VIPIN SINGHAL.
Page No.# 2/6
6: JEEWANI FUELS PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HO 105
MUGHAL PURA
FAIZABAD
U.P.- 224001 AND IS REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE
SRI VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA.
7: R.S. FUEL PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT BAJAJI ROAD
DEORIA
UTTAR PRADESH AND IS REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE SRI VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA.
8: JAGDAMBA COAL CO.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT OPP. DIMPLE CINEMA
JAGADHRI
YAMUNANAGAR
AND IS REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI SHIV KUMAR
SINGH.
9: RAMA VINIMAY COAL PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT BO ARTI DHARAM KANTA
MANI PARVAT ROAD
AYODHYA
FAIZABAD
UTTAR PRADESH- 224001 AND IS REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED
SIGNATORY SRI VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA.
10: JAI BALAJI URJA PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 133/125 TRANSPORT
NAGAR
KANPUR
UTTAR PRADESH AND IS REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
SRI SHIV KUMAR SINGH.
11: MAHALAXMI INDIA PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT GALI NO. 13
Page No.# 3/6
N.H. 37
BASISTHA CHARILI
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI-781029
AND IS REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTOR SRI SRI NAVEEN
KUMAR GUPTA.
12: BEHL COAL FUEL PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT TULSI NAGAR
HOSHIARPUR
PUNJAB AND IS REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
SRI NARESH KUMAR.
13: KALYANI INDIA PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT RAILWAY MALL GODOWN
ROAD
P.O. MANDI GOBINDGARH
FATEGARH SAHIB
PUNJAB AND IS REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
SRI RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA
VERSUS
1:COAL INDIA LTD and 4 ORS.
NETAJI SUBHASH ROAD, KOLKATA, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN. PIN-
700001
2:THE NORTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED
THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR
NORTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED
CHRISTIAN BASTI
G.S. ROAD
GUWAHATI
DIST.- KAMRUPM
ASSAM
PIN.- 781006.
3:THE GENERAL MANAGER Sand M
NORTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED
TINSUKIA
ASSAM
PIN.- 786181.
4:THE GENERAL MANAGER FINANCE
Page No.# 4/6
NORTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED
TINSUKIA
ASSAM
PIN- 786181.
5:AREA SALES MANAGER
COAL INDIA LIMITED
MARGHERITA
PIN.- 786181
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A J HAZARIKA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR.M Z AHMEDSC, COAL INDIA
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
ORDER
Date : 08-05-2019 Heard Ms. BS Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. MZ Ahmed, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. AM Dutta, learned counsel representing Coal India Ltd. and its officials.
In this writ petition, petitioners seek a direction to the respondents, more particularly Northeastern Coalfields, Coal India Ltd. not to levy/realize any contribution in the name of District Mineral Foundation from the contractual bills of the petitioners.
Mr. Ahmed, learned Senior Counsel fairly submits that issue raised in this writ petition has been decided by the Supreme Court in Transferred Case (Civil) No.43/2016 ( Federation of Indian Mineral Industries Vs. Union of India ), decided on 13.10.2017. Conclusions of the Supreme Court are as under: -
" Conclusion
46. Having considered the issues raised by the petitioners and by the learned Additional Solicitor General in different perspectives, we hold:
(i) Merely because the DMFs have been established or are deemed to have been established from a date prior to the issuance of the relevant Page No.# 5/6 notifications does not make their operation retrospective. (ii) In any event, the establishment of the DMFs (assuming the establishment is retrospective) from 12th January, 2015 does not prejudicially affect any holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease. (iii) In view of the failure of the Central Government to prescribe the rate on 12th January, 2015 at which contributions are required to be made to the DMF, the contributions to the DMF cannot be insisted upon with effect from 12th January, 2015. Fixing the maximum rate of contribution to the DMF is insufficient compliance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in Vatika. (iv) Contributions to the DMF are required to be made by the holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease in the case of minerals other than coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from 17th September, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government. (v) Contributions to the DMF are required to be made by the holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease in the case of coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from 20th October, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government or with effect from the date on which the DMF was established by the State Government by a notification, whichever is later.
(vi)The notification dated 31 st August, 2016 issued by the Central Government is invalid and is struck down being ultra vires the rule making power of the Central Government under the MMDR Act.
47. We fervently hope the State Governments recognize their responsibilities and utilize the contributions to the District Mineral Funds quickly and for the object for which they have been established, particularly since the amounts involved are huge.
48. We grant time till 31st December, 2017 to those holders of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease who have not made the full contribution to the District Mineral Funds to pay the contribution, failing which they will be liable to make the contribution with interest at 15% per annum from the due date. We also make it clear that in the event any holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease has mistakenly made contributions to the District Mineral Fund from a date prior to the date that we have determined, such a holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence- cum-mining lease shall not be entitled to any refund but may adjust the contribution against future contributions, without the benefit of any interest."
Page No.# 6/6 In view of above, issue raised in the writ petition would stand covered by the aforesaid directions of the Supreme Court.
Writ petition is disposed of.
JUDGE Biplab Comparing Assistant