Back
2025 Supreme(Jhk) 1615
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI, JJ.
Aaraanya Mines Private Limited - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India through Nominated Authority - Respondent
W.P.(C) No.6275 of 2024
Decided On : 10-09-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate, Mr. Ankit Vishal, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI, Mr. Abhijeet Kumar Singh, CGC
Mrs. Niki Sinha, CGC, Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate
The executive authority can impose penalties under section 24 of the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015, and the existence of parallel proceedings in different forums for the same issue is impermissible.
Headnote:(A) Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 - Sections 24 and 27 - Writ petition for quashing penalty of Rs.11,36,00,000/- imposed for failure to deposit additional compensation - Jurisdiction established for executive authority to impose penalties under section 24 - Writ petition dismissed as maintainable due to ongoing proceedings under section 27. (Paras 11, 36, 79)
(B) Jurisdiction - Parallel proceedings not permissible in different forums for the same issue. -(Paras 71, 76)
(C) Penalties - Implication of 'reasonable cause' differentiates between executive and judicial proceedings under the Act. (Paras 84, 90)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenges a penalty imposed by the Nominated Authority due to non-compliance with payment directives under the CMSP Act, while concurrently pursuing disputes under a tribunal.
Findings of Court:
The Writ Court upheld the executive's authority to impose penalties while affirming the ongoing tribunal proceedings for dispute resolution.
Issues: The Court addressed jurisdictional claims between the executive authority and the tribunal concerning penalty imposition.
Ratio Decidendi: This Court determined the permissibility of imposing penalties under section 24 by executive authorities, while adjudicating the issue concurrently before the tribunal under section 27, thus clarifying the distinction between the two provisions.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. impleadment of necessary party in legal proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. jurisdiction of the high court under article 226. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. arguments against the imposition of penalties. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 4. importance of jurisdiction and response by the central government. (Para 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 5. interpretation of penalties under sections 23 and 24. (Para 41 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 64) |
| 6. dismissal of writ petition and clarification on related disputes. (Para 92 , 93 , 94) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
I.A No.2855 of 2025.
1. The instant interlocutory application being I.A No.2855 of 2025 has been filed by the applicant-M/s Usha Martin Limited to implead it as respondent no.2 in the present proceeding.
2. It has been contended that the applicant-M/s Usha Martin Limited is prior allottee of the Lohari Coal Mine and subsequent thereto after cancellation of all the Coal Mine as per the Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “ Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy. And Ors. , (2014) 9 SCC 516 ” the writ petitioner has been allotted the Lohari Coal block through e-auction and the applicant-M/s Usha Martin Limited has handed over and delivered the possession of Lohari Coal block to the writ petitioner who is coming in possession of the same since the date of vesting under the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 (in short CMSP Act, 2015).
3. It has been contended that although Lohari Coal Mine has been vested in the writ petitioner under the provisions of CMSP Act, 2015 on 22.04.2015 but the writ petitioner has not deposited the amount of additional fixed land compensation of Rs.6,36,28,511.00 for which show cause notices were issued to the writ petitioner under section 24 of CMSP Act, 2015 and finally the impugned order dated 13.11.2024 has been passed by the respondent no.1.
4. It has been contended that being aggrieved, the writ petitioner has approached this Court for stay of the impugned order and, vide order dated 02.12.2024 ad-interim stay was granted to the writ petitioner by this Court.
5. It has been contended that admittedly the intervener is a necessary party as it is only the intervener who is to receive revaluated compensation amount based on fair market value determined by the respondent no.1 amounting to Rs.6,36,28,511.00.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, the applicant is having interest upon the right to sue having interest upon the dispute, hence, is necessary party in view of the fact that he was the prior allottee of the Coal Block in question and due to the effect of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “ Goa Foundation v. Union of India ” (2014) 6 SCC 590 followed by an auction that the Coal block has been allotted in favour of the writ petitioner but as has been contended that part of the land to the extent of Rs.6,36,28,511.00 is still in possession of the Usha Martin Limited by virtue of the provision of CMPS Act, 2015 found to be eligible in the lis.
7. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impleadment of the present applicant as party-respondent to the proceeding is necessary.
8. Accordingly, I.A No. 2855 of 2025 is allowed.
9. Let the necessary impleadment be carried out in the array of the party-respondent during course of the day.
10. Office to proceed accordingly.
W.P.(C) No.6275 of 2024
11. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:
“For issuance of an appropriate writ / order /direction particularly writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside of the order dated 13.11.2024 (Annexure-16) passed by the Additional Secretary/ Nominated Authority, Ministry of Coal, Government of India, whereby and whereunder, penalty to the tune of Rs. 11,36,00,000/- as of 01.11.2024 has been imposed upon the petitioner under section 24 of the Coal Mines Special Provisions Act, 2015 for failure to comply with the directives issued by the Central Government or Nominated Authority along with the paym
