Ms Minerals And Minerals Limited Through Its Agent Mines Shri Bijesh Kumar Jha v. Mines And Geological Survey

What is this about?

Batch of 21 matters (W.P.(C) Nos. 3399/2019, 7016, 7219, 7286, 7318-7327/2017, 5684, 5692/2018, 3875/2021, 771/2022; L.P.A. Nos. 48 and 105/2022; Cont. Case (Civil) No. 43/2018) decided together by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi on 04.03.2025 (M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J. and Deepak Roshan, J.). Core question: whether the District Mining Officer can pass orders and recover the price of mineral from mining lessees under Section 21(5) of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. Held: that power vests in the State Government; under Section 26(2) it can reach a subordinate officer only via a Gazette notification, and none existed — the 02.07.2005 Governor's proceeding covered only royalty assessment/realisation under Section 24; hence the District Mining Officer lacked jurisdiction. All writ petitions allowed; demand notices set aside; deposits refunded within eight weeks with 7% per annum interest; recovery liberty via designated authority; remaining points left open. Petitioners included Hindalco Industries Ltd, Minerals and Minerals Ltd, Steel Authority of India Ltd, ACC Ltd, Usha Martin Ltd, Rajhans Refractories Pvt Ltd, Khatau Liladhar Thacker, Girish Kumar Popat, Madhusudan Singhania and Padam Kumar Jain; respondents included State of Jharkhand, Union of India and District Mining Officers. No precedent was cited in the judgment.