SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 24831

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
M/s.Penna Cement Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana Represented by its Principal Secretary – Respondent
WP 6553/2016



HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.6553 of 2016

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:-

“…declaring a)The action of the respondents 1 and 2 in demanding the 3rd respondent the Contribution towards District Mineral Foundation in respect of mining of coal retrospectively from 12.01.2015 vide letter No.1046/P/2015SF dated 29.01.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequent price notification number 66/2015-16 dated 09.02.2016 and notice dated nil issued by the 3rd respondent inturn demanding the petitioner company to pay the contributions retrospectively for the period 12.01.2015 to 09.02.2016 as wholly arbitrary, illegal, unauthorized, contrary to the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Amendment Act, 2015 and Mines and Minerals Contribution to District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2015 besides violating the petitioners rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the letter No.1046/P/2015SF dated 29.01.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequent price notification number 66/2015-16 dated 09.02.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent to the extent of demanding the petitioner company to pay contributions of District Mineral Fund retrospectively with effect from 15.01.2016 to 09.02.2016; b)The order dated 16.09.2015 issued to the 6th respondent under Section 20-A of the MMDR Amendment Act, 2015 to the extent of directing establishment of District Mineral Fund to have been come into existence retrospectively with effect from 12.01.2015 as wholly arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation Amendment Act, 2015 besides violating Article 14 and

19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India c and pass…”

2. Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court vide order dated 11.03.2016 in W.P.M.P.No.8344 of 2016, passed the following interim order:-

“In the light of the notification bearing No.G.S.R.792(E)

dated 20.10.2015 issued by the Government of India stating that contribution to be made to the District Mineral Foundation is to be paid either from the date of notification of the Rules or the date of establishment of the District Mineral Foundation, whichever is later, and as the Government of Telangana established the District Mineral Foundation only under G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 20.01.2016, there shall be a direction to the respondents not to insist upon any contributions with retrospective effect prior to 20.01.2016 or take any coercive steps with regard thereto.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court in similar circumstances in W.P.Nos.6552 and 10692 of 2016 dated 13.11.2024 has passed the following order:

“6. Considering the decision of the Supreme Court in the Federation of Indian Mineral Industries’s case (supra), it is clear that any demand for contribution raised by the respondent/Singareni Collieries Company Limited on the petitioners can only be from 20.10.2015 or from 20.01.2016, when the DMF was established by the concerned Rules in the State of Telangana and Gazetted on 20.01.2016. Since Federation of Indian Mineral Industries (supra) stipulates “whichever is later”, the petitioners shall be liable for the contributions only from 20.01.2016. The impugned notices making the petitioners liable for contribution from 12.01.2015 to 09.02.2016 are hence contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court and are accordingly set aside.

7. W.P.Nos.6552 and 10692 of 2016 are disposed of by setting aside the impugned notices and holding that the petitioners are liable for the contributions to the respondent/Singareni Collieries Company Limited towards establishment of DMFs on and from 20.01.2016.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays to pass similar order as was passed in W.P.Nos.6552 and 10692 of 2016.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for Singareni Colleries did not dispute the same.

6. In view

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top