The clear prohibition of law, as established by previous Supreme Court cases, influenced the court's decision to quash the impugned order suspending the mining license.

ORDER

B.N. MAHAPATRA, J.-Heard Mr. P. Acharya, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. R.K. Mohapatra, Learned Government Advocate on behalf of opp. Parties.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner-Company seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned Order Dated 29.8.2011 under Annexure-6 passed by the Deputy Director of Mines, Joda, Keonjhar suspending the license of the Petitioner-company urging various grounds and legal contentions.

3. Mr. Acharya, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has drawn our attention to the impugned order which reads thus:

"In view of enquiry by the Railway vigilance and as per instruction of Director of Mines Orissa, Bhubaneswar the license issued for procure & transport of Iron ore for self consumption and export in favour of M/s. Rashmi Cement Ltd. vide this office letter No.4297 dt. 06.2.2010 is hereby suspended until further orders."

4. It is submitted that the only person under the scheme of the Orissa Mineral Rules, 2007 who has been authorized to grant, suspend, revoke or to rescind the licence is the Deputy Director of Mines having jurisdiction over his area and the Director of Mines cannot direct the said competent authority to take the aforesaid action. Placing strong reliance upon the various Judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of commissioner of Police Vs. Gordhandas Bhanji ; AIR 1952 SC 16; State of Punjab & Anr. Vs. Hari Kishan Sharma, reported in AIR 1966 SC 1081; Purtabpore Co. Ltd. Vs. Cane Commissioner of Bihar & Ors., reported in 1970 SC 1896; Ramchandra Keshav Adke (dead) by LRs & Ors. Vs. A Govind Joti Chavare & Ors., AIR 1975, SC 915 and Chandrika Jha Vs. State of Bihar, reported in AIR 1984 SC 322 Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the impugned order under Annexure -6 passed by the Deputy Director of Mines Opp. Party No.3 as per the instruction of the Director of Mines, is totally impermissible in Law or that reason it is prayed that the impugned order is liable to be quashed. This matter was heard on 12.09.2011 and on that day Learned Government was directed to take instruction in the matter from the Opp. Party No.3. Today, Learned Government Advocate• submits that he has no instruction as to whether the impugned order under Annexure-6 has been revoked or not. His submission is placed in record.

We have carefully gone through the impugned order with reference to the legal contentions urged by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. It is clearly stated in the impugned order that as per instruction of Director of Mines, Orissa, Bhubaneswar the license issued to procure & transport of Iron are for self consumption and export in favour of the Petitioner-company vide letter No.4297 dt. 6.2.2010 is hereby suspended until further orders, which is not at all legal and valid in view of the clear prohibition of law, laid down by a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Police Vs. Gordhandas Bhanji, reported in AIR 1952 SC 16 and subsequently by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab &, Anr. Vs. Hari Kishan Sharma, reported in AIR 1966 SC 1081.

In this view of the matter, we are of the view that the impugned order is liable to be quashed and is accordingly quashed.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

I agree.

Appeal allowed.