Hindalco Industries Limited, a Company incorporated under the its registered office at One Companies v. 1. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2950 of 2024 ----- Hindalco Industries Limited, a Company incorporated under the its registered office at One Companies Act, 1956 and having International Centre, 21st Floor, D Wing, Unit 2101 to 2108, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai – 400013, Maharashtra, India, through its Authorized Signatory – Vijay Kant Dubey, aged about 45 years, son of Sri Ganesh Dubey resident of Vasundhara Mega Mart, 2nd Floor, Near Argora Chowk, P.O. Ashok Nagar, P.S. Argora, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary Mines, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Certificate Officer (Mines), South Chhotanagpur, Circle, Nepal House, Near BMP Hospital, Doranda, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. District Mining Officer, Gumla, having its office at Gumla, P.O. Gumla, P.S. Gumla, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … … Respondents With W.P.(C) No. 2952 of 2024 -----
Legal Reasoning
Hindalco Industries Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at One International Centre, 21st Floor, D Wing, Unit 2101 to 2108, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai – 400013, Maharashtra, India, through its Authorized Signatory – Vijay Kant Dubey, aged about 45 years, son of Sri Ganesh Dubey resident of Vasundhara Mega Mart, 2nd Floor, Near Argora Chowk, P.O. Ashok Nagar, P.S. Argora, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary Mines, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Certificate Officer (Mines), South Chhotanagpur, Circle, Nepal House, Near BMP Hospital, Doranda, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. District Mining Officer, Gumla, having its office at Gumla, P.O. Gumla, P.S. Gumla, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … … Respondents With W.P.(C) No. 4081 of 2024 ----- Page 1 Minerals and Minerals Limited, a Company incorporated under the its registered office at One Companies Act, 1956 and having International Centre, 21st Floor, D Wing, Unit 2101 to 2108, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai – 400013, Maharashtra, India, through its Authorized Signatory – Vijay Kant Dubey, aged about 45 years, son of Sri Ganesh Dubey resident of Vasundhara Mega Mart, 2nd Floor, Near Argora Chowk, P.O. Ashok Nagar, P.S. Argora, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary Mines, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Certificate Officer (Mines), South Chhotanagpur, Circle, Nepal House, Near BMP Hospital, Doranda, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. District Mining Officer, Gumla, having its office at Gumla, P.O. Gumla, P.S. Gumla, District Ranchi, Jharkhand … … … Respondents ------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI For the Petitioner For the Res-State ------ : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Ankit Vishal, Advocate : Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, AC to AAG - II ------ Order No. 04/Dated 05th August, 2024 1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, AC to AAG - II, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State. 2. The petitioners file these petitions seeking following relief in the respective writ petitions: W.P.(C) No. 2950 of 2024: To quash the letter no. 262/M dated 25.02.2021 and all the consequential letters and reminders including letter no. 264/M dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure-2 series) [collectively referred to as the impugned letters] issued by the District Mining Officer, Gumla whereby on account of purported short levy of royalty during the Financial Year 2019-2020, a sum of Rs.14,81,059.21/- along with interest has been demanded. W.P.(C) No. 2952 of 2024: Page 2 To quash the letter no. 259/M dated 25.02.2021 and all the consequential letters and reminders including letter no. 262/M dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure – 2 series) [collectively referred to as the impugned letters] issued by the District Mining Officer, Gumla whereby on account of purported short levy of royalty during the period 2019-2020, a sum of Rs. 5,72,686.57/- along with interest has been demanded. W.P.(C) No. 4081 of 2024: To quash the letter no.261/M dated 25.02.2021 and all the consequential letters and reminders including letter no.263/M dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure-2 series) [collectively referred to as the impugned letters] issued by the District Mining Officer, Gumla whereby on account of purported short levy of royalty during the Financial Year 2019-2020, a sum of Rs.5,72,686.57/- along with interest has been demanded. 3. But, Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended before this Court that since the petitioners were not given due opportunity, was not able to satisfy the authority, as such, the matter may be remanded back. 4. While, Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, learned AC to AAG - II, appearing for the respondents-State vehemently contended that the certificate proceedings being Certificate Case No. 12(GML) of 2023-24, Certificate Case No.11(GML) of 2023-24, Certificate Case No.10(GML) of 2023-24 are pending wherein the petitioners have already submitted its jurisdiction by filing objection, therefore, whatever orders will be passed in the certificate proceedings, the same can also be challenged before a higher forum, therefore, at this point of time, the apprehension of the respondents is that it will frustrate the proceedings which have been initiated against the petitioners and objections have already been filed under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 itself, as such, if the petitioners so desire, they may raise all the available points so that the same may be considered as per the law, Page 3 therefore, unless the matter is adjudicated by the competent authority, the instant writ petitions cannot sustain in the eyes of law. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and going through the records and without expressing the opinion on the merits of the case itself since the petitioners have already submitted its jurisdiction by filing its objection in the certificate proceeding, as such, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present writ petitions granting liberty to the petitioners to pursue their remedy, in accordance with law, before the said forum. 6. With the liberty aforesaid, the instant writ petitions are
Decision
disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Umesh/-N.A.F.R. Page 4