The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 23731 of 2024 Sanjaya Kumar Kar, aged about 49 years, S/o. Saroj Prasad Kar, At/P.O. Kaliapani, P.S. Kaliapani, Dist- Jajpur. …. Petitioner Ms. Jacquiline Jena, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha, represented through Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Odisha Secretariat, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda and others …. Opposite Parties Mrs. Suman Pattnaik, Addl. Govt. Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No.
Decision
ORDER 02.12.2024 02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application seeking a direction to the Collector, Jajpur-opposite party No.3 to allow the small trucks (6 wheelers) to transport minerals from mines of Jajpur district to any destination within the State of Odisha and big trucks (10 wheelers and above) to transport minerals from the mines of the district to any destination outside the State of Odisha in pursuance of an earlier order dated 01.10.2009 passed by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Jajpur in Misc. Case No.17/2009 in compliance of this Court’s order dated 18.08.2009 passed in W.P.(C) No.8685 of 2009. Page 1 of 7 3. The petitioner claims to be an owner of small trucks (6-wheeler) and a member of Sukinda Mineral Truck Owners’ Association as well as Khani Prabhabita Truck Owner Association. It is asserted in the writ petition that the truck owners were facing various problems on the question of giving loading to the small vehicles and heavy vehicles. It was the grievance of the small truck owners that if heavy vehicles were allowed to transport the minerals to short distances, it would not be economical for the small truck owners to transport minerals at the rate the heavy vehicles could carry. Keeping in view the interest of all including that of the transporters, a meeting was held in the office of the Deputy Director of Mines, Jajpur on 01.12.2008 wherein a decision was taken to give loading to the heavy vehicles (ten wheelers and above) for destination to Jharsuguda, Rourkela and outside the State. The heavy vehicles (ten wheelers) were not allowed to carry minerals to other destinations within the State of Odisha except Rourkela and Jharsuguda. As far as other destinations within the State of Odisha, loading was to be given to the small trucks (six wheelers). Accordingly, in pursuance of the said decision, an order was passed by the Collector, Jajpur on 01.10.2009 in Misc. Case No.17/2009. Deviating from the said decision dated 01.10.2009, the then Collector, Jajpur had permitted some big trucks to transport mineral within the State of Odisha other than Jharsuguda and Rourkela. Later, several members of the association had approached the Collector, Jajpur to enforce the decision dated 01.10.2009. Some of the truck owners approached Page 2 of 7 this Court by filing writ petition giving rise to W.P.(C) No.30406 of 2021. The said petition was disposed of on 29.10.2021 with the following order: “1. The Petitioners’ representation dated 30th July, 2021 will be examined by the Collector, Jajpur and after issuing notice to the Petitioners and giving them a hearing, an appropriate order will be passed thereon not later January, 2022 and communicated the same to the Petitioners not later than 24th January, 2022. The Court clarifies that it has not expressed any opinion on the contentions of the Petitioners. than 17th 2. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.” 4. It is the petitioner’s case that the principle of “First Come First Load” mentioned in the order dated 01.10.2009 of the Collector was to be applied for both small and heavy trucks. Therefore, the said principle should be applied to small trucks, which should be allowed to transport minerals from mines of Jajpur to any destination within the State of Odisha and following the same principle the big trucks should be allowed to transport to any other destination outside the State of Odisha. The Petitioner also filed a representation on 01.11.2021 before the Collector, Jajpur seeking an opportunity of hearing. Soon thereafter, he filed a writ petition giving rise to W.P.(C) No.35838 of 2021 which was disposed of by an order dated 16.11.2021 in the following terms: “1. The Petitioner claims to be a small truck owner operating in Sukinda and Page 3 of 7 engaged in transporting iron ore. He also wants to be heard by the Collector, Jajpur in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) on 29th October, 2021 No.30406 of 2021. 2. This Court does not propose to burden the Collector with more and more requests for personal hearing of individual truck owners. It will be open to the Petitioner to give in writing his suggestions to the Collector not later than 1st December, 2021 and that will be taken into account by the Collector when complying with the order already passed by this Court in the aforementioned writ petition. 3. No further direction is called for in this petition. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.” 5. In the light of the aforesaid orders passed by this Court, the Collector, Jajpur after considering the representations passed the following orders on 16.12.2021: “The case record is put-up to-day for order. Heard the petitioners the petitioners along with orders of the Hon’ble High Court, Odisha, Cuttack in W.P.(C) No.30406/2021 & 35838/2021. passed The contention of the representations are that, loading of the tucks of the petitioners & other irrespective of big and small trucks, following the principle of “First Come First Load Basis” and giving equal weightage to all the truck owners as per direction of the Hon’ble High Court. Page 4 of 7 that, small trucks (six Further claims wheelers) may be allowed to transport minerals from the mines of jajpur district to any destination within the State of Odisha and big trucks (ten wheelers and above) may be allowed to any destination outside the State of Odisha along with to Jharsuguda and Rourkela. Gone through the representations of the petitioners, along with the discussion with various mine operators, where they have mentioned that there is an "intelligible deferentia” between small and big trucks. The decision to give load to the concerned truck comes within the ambit of commercial decision by private firms, and direct interference by the administration is against to protection constitutional commercial units. They have further ensured that first come first load rule is being implemented as per the order of District Magistrate and being applied to both categories (illegible) listing maintained. given A.D.M. Kalinganagar is hereby directed to take regular meetings with various mine owners to ensure first come first load is maintained. As far as decision as to which category of vehicles be used, it is a pure commercial decision based on profit-cost calculation by the private firms and cannot be interfered with. Accordingly the representations are disposed of. Orders pronounced in the open court to-day i.e. 16th December, 2021.” (Underlined for emphasis) Page 5 of 7 6. The petitioner did not question the correctness of the said order of the Collector, Jajpur. Nearly three years thereafter the present writ petition has been filed with an allegation that the said order of 2021 is being implemented. 7. Upon careful reading of the impugned order, we are of the view that the present writ application has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 16.12.2021. In response to a query as to why the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly, Ms. Jacquiline Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is mainly because now the said order is being implemented. 8. We do not find any merit in the present writ application for two reasons. Firstly, the reasons assigned in the impugned order, in our opinion, cannot be termed as illegal or arbitrary. The Collector has rightly opined in the impugned order that decision to give load to the concerned trucks comes within the commercial decision of the private persons and interference by the administration in such matters would be unwarranted. In our opinion, the Court exercising power of judicial review should refrain from interfering with such decisions involving commercial aspects unless the same is shown to be violative of any constitutional or statutory provision. 9. Secondly, the impugned order was passed in 2021. Neither the petitioner nor any other person/body has questioned the decision. They, thus, accepted the said order. Three years Page 6 of 7 thereafter the present writ application has been filed which deserves to be dismissed also on the ground of delay and latches. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. Chief Justice (Chakradhari Sharan Singh) Judge (Savitri Ratho) SK Jena/Secy. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 06-Dec-2024 13:34:53 Page 7 of 7