Advocates:
['M/S PRABHU PRASAD MOHANTY', '', 'G SENAPATI', 'D MOHAPATRA', 'A K BOSEASGI', '', 'AGA', 'DEBRAJ MOHANTY', 'M/S A MISHRA B P PANDA', 'D BEHERA', 'AGAMR DEBRAJ MOHANTYM/S A MISHRA B P PANDAMR D BEHERA']

Page 1 of 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P (C) No. 18679 of 2017

M/s Vikram Private Ltd.

&..

Petitioner

Mr. D. Mohapatra, Advocate

Vs.

Union of India and others

&..

Opposite Parties

Mr. P.K. Parhi, ASGI &

Mr. D. Mohanty, Advocate (O.P.4)

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER

13.07.2022

Order No.

06.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Heard.

3.

The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the notice

dated 30.09.2016 vide Anexure-3 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 12.09.2017 while issuing notice to

the Opposite Parties had passed the following order:-

<Connect with W.P. (C) No.11732 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 purchaser.

3.

The petitioner is aggrieved by imposition of District

Mineral Foundation Fund and the National Mineral

Exploration Trust Fund which is applicable 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,

Page 2 of 3

which provisions have come into force with effect from 1

2.01.2015 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 A.K. Bose, learned Assistant Solicitor General of

India has put in appearance on behalf of opposite parties no.1

and 2 and learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appears for op p.

party no.3. Let extra copies of the writ petition be served on

them.

5.

Steps to serve opposite parties no.4 and 5 be taken by

Speed Post with A.D. within three days. Office shall send

notice fixing an early returnable date.

6.

All the opposite parties may file their counter

affidavits by the next date. List this matter on the date fixed in

the notice.

7.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the

case and keeping in view t he 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 notice dated 30.09.2016, (Annexure-1) issued

by opposite party no.5 shall remain stayed till the next date.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on

proper application.=

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 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

Page 3 of 3

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 t