The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6237 of 2024 1. M/s. Deepak Steel & Power Limited, Keonjhar, Odisha 2. Satyasundar Jena ….. Petitioners Mr. Gouri Mohan Rath, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha 2. Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Lok Seva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar 3. Principal Secretary, Department of Steel and Mines, Secretariat Building, Bhubaneswar 4. Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment & Climate Change, Kharvel Bhawan, Bhubaneswar 5. Collector, Keonjhar 6. Sub-Collector, Champua 7. Tahasildar, Barbil 8. Divisional Forest Officer, Keonjhar 9. Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Page 1 of 6 Corporation (IDCO), Janpath, Bhubaneswar 10. Industrial Promotion and Investment Corporation of Orissa Ltd (IPICOL), Janpath, Bhubaneswar 11. Odisha Mining Corporation Ltd., OMC house, Bhubaneswar ..... Opp. Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. S.K. Jee, Addl. Govt. Advocate Mr. P.K. Muduli, Caveator CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No.
Decision
ORDER 04.11.2024 01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Heard. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner M/s. Deepak Steel & Power Limited, Keonjhar represented through its Director Satyasundar Jena with the following prayer: “a) A writ of and/or in the nature of Certiorari do issue calling upon the opp. Parties to transmit all records relating to the present case such that conscionable justice may be done upon considering the same and by Page 2 of 6 the Opp. quashing and/or setting aside the order dtd. 13/12/2023 passed by the Opp. Party No.5 under Annexure-21; in the nature of mandamus b) A writ commanding Parties, more specifically the. O.P. no.5 to reconsider the Lease Case No.15 of 2008 in terms of the reports submitted by the appropriate authority in the said proceeding and the assurances made by the Government in the MoU dated 04/05/2005 under Annexure-2; c) Rule NISI in terms of prayers above; d) Issue any appropriate order/orders deemed fit in the fact and circumstances of the case.” It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that while passing the impugned order dated 13.12.2023 under Anneuxre-21, the Collector & District Magistrate, Keonjhar, opp. party no.5 has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for settlement of Govt. land available in Khata No.126(AJA) in village- Topadihi mainly on the ground that the lease proposal could not be materialized in view of the complain from one Ramesh Prasad Sao, mines owner that the proposed lease area is coming under his surface right of lease hold area and some of the plots are found as sabik kisam “Jungle”. However, the said land is under encroachment of the petitioner M/s. Deepak Steel & Power Ltd. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that so far as the complain from Ramesh Prasad Sao is concerned, that land which has been allowed to him has already been excluded which Page 3 of 6 would be evident from the order dated 18.05.2009 vide Annexure-6 and so far as forest land is concerned, the authorities have given permission to the petitioner to establish the steel plant and it has been made functional since 2009 and therefore, at this stage, in view of the order passed by the Collector, Keonjhar, opp. party no.5, the petitioner will face immense difficulty if he has to close the plant. Mr. P.K. Muduli, learned counsel for the Caveator submitted that the said land has already been allotted to the Odisha Mining Corporation (OMC), opp. party no.11 since 2021 and earlier the petitioner approached this Court for similar relief in W.P.(C) No.28605 of 2011 which was disposed of on 20.04.2022 and while disposing of the same, the Division Bench of this Court had taken into account the affidavit filed by the opp. party no.4 wherein it has been mentioned that without waiting for permission from the Govt. of India under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, the petitioner had gone ahead and established a Sponge Iron Plant over the forest land and the forest lands in Sabik Kisam have been converted by the petitioner into non-forest land after 1980 without complying with the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the petitioner appeared to have even laid a water pipe line, within Sidhamath Reserved Forests, of a length of 1775 meters for drawing water illegally from Karo River for the Sponge Iron Plant and a forest offence case has been registered against the petitioner as a result of Page 4 of 6 above violations. The order further reveals that though counter affidavit has been filed since 2011, but no rejoinder affidavit has been filed and accordingly, the Court came to the conclusion that the prayer of the petitioner that a direction for grant of the lease in respect of the land in question in favour of the petitioner on a formal basis or to get IDCO to transfer the land in question in its favour cannot be accepted and accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the forest offence case which was instituted against the petitioner has been quashed in CRLMC No.1761 of 2014 which was disposed of on 31.07.2014. Learned counsel further submitted that thereafter another writ petition has been filed before this Court in W.P.(C) No.6579 of 2023 which was disposed of 03.03.2023 wherein this Court directed the authorities to consider the fresh representation, if any, filed by the petitioner by 10th March, 2023 and directed status quo to be maintained till two weeks and further direction was issued that in the event no representation was made within that time, the order of status quo would stand automatically vacated. Mr. P.K. Muduli, learned counsel for the Caveator further submitted that when the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.6579 of 2023, the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.28605 of 2011, which was disposed of on 20.04.2022, has not been brought to the notice of the Court. Page 5 of 6 Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the counter affidavit which has been filed by the opp. party no.4 in W.P.(C) No.28605 of 2011 has not reflected the correct state of affairs and it contains misleading statement on the face of it, for which the said order was passed. Since it was open to the petitioner to file review petition or challenge the order before the Hon’ble Supreme Court but conspicuously, the same has not been done and when the said order attained its finality, we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order dated 20.04.2022 and we are not inclined to accept another writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition, being devoid of merits, stands dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Issue certified copy as per Rules. Judge ( S.K. Sahoo) sipun (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 06-Nov-2024 10:54:28 Page 6 of 6