Orissa High Court
Jayanti Jena vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opp. ... on 15 April, 2025
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) NO. 7256 OF 2025
Jayanti Jena .... Petitioner
Mr. Subir Palit, Senior Advocate
being assisted by Ms. Ananya Pradhan, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Bimbisar Das,
Additional Government Advocate
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 15.04.2025 4. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Memo of appearance filed by Mr. Subir Palit, learned Senior Advocate is taken on record.
3. The Petitioner in this writ petition prays for a direction to set aside the Letter No.473 dated 3rd February, 2023 (Annexure-19) issued by the Tahasildar, Dharmasala-Opposite Party No.5 cancelling the tender/lease granted in her favour and forfeiting the security deposit and EMD submitted by her in respect of Dankari Quarry BSQ No.15. The Petitioner also prays for a direction to facilitate the relocation of the aforesaid quarry operation after proper demarcation in terms of the provisions under the Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016 (for short 'OMMC Rules, 2016') or facilitate removal of the water naturally clogged in the quarry area.
Page 1 of 64. Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate submits that the Petitioner was the successful bidder in the auction of Dankari Quarry BSQ No.15 being the highest bidder. Accordingly, Form-F was issued in favour of the Petitioner vide Letter No.4035 dated 7th October, 2017 (Annexure-2). The Petitioner thereafter deposited Rs.4,55,000/- on 24th October, 2017 and Rs.22,90,700/- on 10th November, 2017 towards earnest money and security deposit. Preparation of the Mining Plan by the State Government and subsequent grant of Environmental Clearance by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) remained pending with the authorities for more than five years for no fault of the Petitioner. The Petitioner received the mining plan on 31st January, 2022 and environmental clearance on 7th June, 2022 respectively. While the matter stood thus, a demand was raised against the Petitioner to deposit Rs.1,11,79,980/- towards advance payment of the entire Minimum Guaranted Quantity (MGQ) along with other components attached to the said amount. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner moved this Court in W.P.(C) No. 21906 of 2022 challenging the vires of Rule 33(3) and 33(5) of the OMMC Rules, 2016. Said writ petition was, however, disposed of on 19th January, 2023 allowing the Petitioner to make the aforesaid payment in installments. Before making payment of first installment, the Petitioner visited the quarry and found that 70% to 80% of the entire quarry area has been water-logged and it was not feasible for mining operation. Accordingly, the Petitioner made a representation to the Tahasildar, Dharmasala bringing the aforesaid fact to his notice under Annexure-10 Page 2 of 6 series. However, the Tahasildar, Dharmasala instead of redressing the grievance of the Petitioner issued Letter No.392 dated 30th January, 2023 (Annexure-11) raising demand to make payment of 50% of the statutory demand and execute the lease agreement in respect of the aforesaid quarry. Upon receipt of the said letter, the Petitioner expressed her inability to execute the lease agreement as she was not in a position to operate the quarry because of water logging. When the matter stood thus, the health condition of her husband was deteriorated for which she could not pursue the matter with the Tahasildar, Dharmasala. Although the Petitioner has been adjudged as the successful bidder, but, due to the aforesaid reason, she could not execute the lease agreement and operate the quarry.
5. At this juncture, GA & PG Department Notification No.32882 dated 21st November, 2022 was issued, which was published in the official gazette on 27th December, 2022 under Annexure-17 series. By virtue of the said notification, the Mining Officer became the Competent Authority to deal with the minor minerals. Pursuant to the notification dated 21st November, 2022, the administrative control of the Revenue and Disaster Management Department was transferred to the Mines and Steel Department vide Notification No.3801 dated 1st February, 2023 (Annexure-17 series). Thus, the Tahasildar, Dharmasala was divested of the power of Competent Authority to deal with minor minerals and leases of minor minerals granted with effect from the date of notification. Ignoring the same, the Tahasildar, Dharmasala vide his Letter No.473 dated 3rd February, 2023 issued the impugned letter of cancellation of Page 3 of 6 lease and forfeiture of the security deposit and EMD. Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner, therefore, submits that the impugned letter under Annexure-19 is without jurisdiction and any consequential action taken in pursuance thereof is also illegal and not sustainable in law.
6. Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate further submits that Rule 28(8) of OMMC Rules, 2016 read with Rule 22 E of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 confer power on the Authorized Officer, namely, Deputy Director of Mines, to modify the mining plan on fulfillment of the conditions more-fully stated therein. Although the Petitioner made an application for modification of the mining plan and to provide an alternative site, which is capable of mining, the same has not yet been considered and is kept pending. Hence, finding no other alternative, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the aforesaid relief.
7. Mr. Das, learned Additional Government Advocate although concedes to the legal position that the Tahasildar, Dharmasala had no jurisdiction or authority to issue letter under Annexure-19, but he prays for an adjournment to take instruction in the matter, more particularly with regard to the up-to-date status of the application stated to have been filed by the Petitioner for modification of the mining plan and to provide alternative site of mining operation. He, however, submits that the Tahasildar, Dharmasala was denuded of the power to issue letter under Annexure-19 cancelling the tender/lease and forfeiting the EMD as well as security deposit made by the Page 4 of 6 Petitioner in view of the notification No.3801 dated 1st February, 2023.
8. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, this Court finds that the issues involved in this writ petition are two folds. Firstly, whether the Tahasildar, Dharmasala had power/jurisdiction under law to issue impugned letter under Annexure-19 cancelling the auction of Dankari Quarry BSQ No.15 granted in favour of the Petitioner and forfeiting the EMD as well as security deposit made by her. Secondly, whether the Petitioner is entitled to modification of the lease/mining area as requested by her.
9. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that administrative control of the minor minerals was transferred from Revenue and Disaster Management Department to Mines and Steel Department of the Government of Odisha vide GA & PG Department Notification No.32882 dated 21st November, 2022, which was published in the official gazette on 27th December, 2022. In furtherance to such notification, the Revenue and Disaster Management Department transferred the administrative control to the Mines and Steel Department vide Notification No.3801 dated 1st February, 2023 of the Government of Odisha with regard to the subject matter of minor minerals. On and from the date of such notification, the Mining Officer became the Competent Authority under the OMMC Rules,2016 in place of Tahasildar.
9. Admittedly, the impugned letter under Anenxure-19 cancelling the tender/lease granted in favour of the Petitioner in respect of Dankari Quarry BSQ No.15 was issued on 3rd Page 5 of 6 February, 2023, i.e. after issuance of the Notification No.3801 dated 1st February, 2023. Thus, the Tahasildar, Dharmasala lacked jurisdiction to issue impugned letter under Annexure-19 on 3rd February, 2023. As such, this Court has no hesitation to set aside the letter dated 3rd February, 2023 (Annexure-19) issued by the Tahasildar, Dharmasala being without jurisdiction.
10. Accordingly, the letter dated 3rd February, 2023 (Annexure-19) issued by the Tahasildar, Dharmasala is set aside and any consequential action taken in pursuance thereof is also set aside.
11. So far as the application made by the Petitioner for modification of the mining plan and to provide alternate site to the Petitioner for mining operation, is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that the Authorized Officer before whom the application is stated to be pending should take a decision on the same at an early date, if the same is still pending.
12. The writ petition is accordingly allowed to the aforesaid extent.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(Harish Tandon ) Chief Justice bks (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BIJAY KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 17-Apr-2025 11:08:32 Page 6 of 6