Advocates:
['M/S ASIT KU DASH', '', 'S S PADHY', 'P MOHANTY', 'G MOHANTY', 'CGC']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 17481 of 2017

Debasish Khandual

&..

Petitioner

Mr. A.K. Dash, Advocate

Vs.

Union of India & Ors.

&..

Opposite parties

Mr. T.K. Patnaik, ASC

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

31.03.2022

Order No.

3

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Heard Mr. A.K. Dash, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. T.K. Patnaik, learned Additional Standing

Counsel for the State.

3.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging

the notice dated 17.12.2016 vide Anexure-1 issued by the

General Manager (S&M), Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Jagriti

Vihar, Sambalpur directing him to deposit the differential

amount of District Mineral Foundation Contribution against

coal lifted during the period in question.

4.

This Court vide order dated 9^th March, 2018 while

issuing notice to the opposite parties had passed the

following order:-

<Connect with W.P.(C) No. 3727 of 2017.

2. The submission of learned counsel for the

petitioner is that the petitioner does not hold any

mining lease or prospecting lease and is merely a

trader.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by imposition of

District Mineral Foundation Fund and the National

Mineral Exploration Trust Fund which is applicable

2

only in the case of a Mining Lease Holder or

Prospecting Mining Lease Holder. It is submitted

that

the

provision

for

imposition

of

such

contribution was provided under Sections 9-B and

9-C of the Minor Mineral (Development and

Regulation) Act, 1957, which provisions have come

into force with effect from 12.01.2015 and notified

on 20th October, 2015, and the District Mineral

Foundations (DMF) constituted on 06.02.2016. As

such, no recovery can be made from the petitioner

for a period prior to the notification dated

06.02.2016, even if the petitioner is found liable for

payment of any amount.

4. Shri B. Dash, learned Central Government

Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of

opposite party No.1 and learned Government

Advocate appears for the opp. party no.2. Let extra

copies of the writ petition be served on them.

5.Steps to serve opposite party No.3 be taken within

three days by Speed Post with A.D.. Office shall

send notice fixing an early returnable date.

6.All the opposite parties may file their counter

affidavits by the next date.

7.List this matter on the date fixed in the notice.

8.Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case and keeping in view the submission of the

learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the

opinion that the petitioner has made out a prima

facie case for grant of interim protection.

Accordingly, it is directed that the recovery

pursuant to the Supplementary Tax Invoice as per

notice dated 17.12.2016 (Annexure-1 series) issued

by opposite party no.3 shall remain stayed till the

next date.=

5.

Now the issue is concluded by the Hon9ble Supreme

Court in the case of Federation of Indian Mineral Industries

and others-v-Union of India and another, reported in (2017)

16 SCC 186, wherein the Hon9ble Supreme Court at

paragraph-52.5 had observed as follows:-

<Contributions to the DMF are required to be

made by the holder of a mining lease or a

prospecting licence-cum-mining lease in the case of

3

coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from

20.10.2015 when the rates were prescribed by the

Central Government or with effect from the date on

which the DMF was established by the State

Government by a notification, whichever is later.=

6.

In that view of the matter, since the issue is concluded,

the DMF is required to be collected only from the date on

which it came into force. It is stated at the Bar that DMF has

been constituted in the State of Odisha on 6^th February, 2016.

In that view of the matter, the collection prior to that is

contrary to the decision of the Hon9ble Supreme Cou