Allowed

M/S.Prakash Industries Ltd. v. Omc Ltd.

Orissa HC4 Mar 2022WP(C)/8837/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition holding that District Mineral Foundation contributions are due only from 17.09.2015 as per Supreme Court precedent. Recovery for the prior period must be refunded or adjusted at the petitioner's request. The question of future liability remains open.

What did the court decide?

No further recovery of DMF for the period prior to 17.09.2015; prior collections to be refunded or adjusted per petitioner's request.

M/S.Prakash Industries Ltd. Vs Omc Ltd. — Mining and Natural Resources | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 8837 of 2016

¶4

M/s Prakash Industries Ltd.

¶5

Petitioner

¶6

Mr. D.P. Nanda, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. R.K. Kanungo, Adv.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

….. Odisha Mining corporation Opposite parties Ltd. & another Mr. S. Mohanty, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. R.R. Swain, Adv.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

¶11

ORDER 04.03.2022

¶12

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 27 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 05.03.2016 under Annexures-4 issued by the Odisha Mining Corporation Limited, directing it to deposit the amount of District Mineral Foundation Contribution against iron ore lifted during different periods.

¶13

This Court, vide order dated 20.05.2016 while issuing notice to the opposite parties, had stayed the recovery pursuant to the notices dated 05.03.2016 under Annexures-4 issued by opposite party no.1.

¶14

¶15

Now the issue is concluded by the Hon’ble 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 Hon’ble Supreme Court at paragraph-52.4 has observed as follows:

¶16

“52.4. 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 minerals other than coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from 17-9-2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government.”

¶17

In that view of the matter, since the issue is concluded, the DMF is required to be collected with effect from 17.09.2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government. In that view of the matter, the collection prior to 17.09.2015 is contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and is required to be either refunded or to be adjusted against future transaction.

¶18

The DMF collected prior to 17.09.2015 will be either refunded or adjusted as per request of the petitioner to the authority.

¶19

We have not decided the dispute with regard to liability for payment of DMF either by the petitioner or by Odisha Mining Corporation. It will be open for the petitioner to agitate that issue before the competent Court. In that view of the matter, no further recovery will

¶20

¶21

be made pertaining to the period prior to 17.09.2015. 8. This writ petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.

¶22

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶23

Ashok

¶24

……………………... ( DR. B.R. SARANGI ) JUDGE

¶25

…………….…………..……. ( V. NARASINGH ) JUDGE

M/S.Prakash Industries Ltd. v. Omc Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Prakash Industries Ltd. v. Omc Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoranjan Dash Vs E.O,Brajaraj Nagar

Bireen Kumar Giri Vs the Collector, Cuttack

Lalan Prasad Gupta Vs State of Odisha

Srikant Singh Vs State of Odisha

Janmejay Nath Vs Chief Engineer

Gopinath Mahanti Vs State and Anr.