Disposed¶36

Patitapaban Swain v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC19 Feb 2025WP(C)/20841/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court, Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.20841 of 2024; Patitapaban Swain v. State of Odisha and others; sand quarry lease; Murkundi Chitrotpala Sand Quarry, Cuttack; royalty recalculation; extra demand Rs.84,00,556 for 2022-23; Tahasildar Kishannagar Lease Case No.33/2020-21; Mining Officer Cuttack; appeal memo acceptance refused by Sub-Collector and Deputy Director of Mines; writ disposed of as infructuous on 19.02.2025; appeal hearing fixed for 21.02.2025; bench K.R. Mohapatra and S.K. Mishra.

What did the court decide?

Once the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle accepted the Memorandum of Appeal and fixed the hearing date, nothing remained to be adjudicated in the writ petition, which was accordingly disposed of as infructuous. ¶35

Patitapaban Swain Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C). NO.20841 OF 2024

¶3

Patitapaban Swain

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Soubhagya Swain, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

Mr. Debashis Tripathy, Additional Government Advocate

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

19.02.2025

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶17

Petitioner in this writ petition prays for the following

¶18

relief.

¶19

“It is therefore prayed by the petitioner Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to considering facts stated above, admit the writ, issue notice to the opposite parties, call for records and after hearing of the parties, pass appropriate writ/writ (s) set-aside order dated 27.07.2023 U/A-9 passed by Tahasildar, Kishnnagar, O.P. No.5 in Lease Case No.33/2020-21 being miscalculated the Royalty etc. and raised extra demand of Rs.84,00,556.00 for the year 2022-23 Murkundi Chitrotpala Sand Quarry, Cuttack and order dated 16.08.2023 U/A-11 passed by the O.P. No.7, Mining Officer, Cuttack being arbitrary and illegal;

¶20

And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall duty bound ever pray.”

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

Considering the submission of Mr. Swain, learned counsel for the Petitioner that although a remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner against the order impugned herein but his Memorandum of Appeal is not being accepted by the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle, Cuttack, this Court passed the following order.

¶23

“ORDER

¶24

12.02.2025

¶25

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶26

2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 27th July, 2023 (Annexure-9) passed by the Tahasildar, Kishannagar-Opposite Party No.5 in lease Case No.33 of 2020-2021.

¶27

3. It is submitted by Mr. Swain, leaned counsel for the Petitioner that assailing the same, the Petitioner intended to file an Appeal before the Sub-Collector, Cuttack. He refused to accept the Appeal Memo on the ground that the land has been transferred to the Department of Steel and Mines in the meantime. Hence SubCollector, Cuttack advised the Petitioner to file an Appeal before the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle. But, the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle is not accepting the Appeal Memo stating that he has no jurisdiction to entertain such appeal. Hence, the Petitioner sent the Appeal Memo and relevant enclosures through e-mail. As yet, no response has been made by the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle.

¶28

4. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel prays for an adjournment to take instruction on the same.

¶29

5. Put up this matter on 19^th February, 2025.

¶30

6. Instruction, if any, shall be obtained in the meantime positively.”

¶31

Page 2 of 3

¶32

Kanhu

¶33

Mr. Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate, on instruction, submits that the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle, Cuttack on acceptance of Memorandum of Appeal filed by the Petitioner issued letter No.537, dated 15^th February, 2025 fixing the date of hearing of the Appeal to 21^st February, 2025 at 11:00 A.M.

¶34

Mr. Swain, learned counsel for the Petitioner also submits that he has received the notice of fixing a date of hearing by the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle, Cuttack and undertakes to participate in the proceeding. In that view of the matter, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the writ petition.

¶35

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous with an observation that the Deputy Director of Mines, Cuttack Circle, Cuttack is expected to adjudicate the Appeal in accordance with law giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶36

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶37

(S.K. Mishra)

¶38

Judge

¶39

Signature Not Verified

¶40

Digitally Signed Signed by: KANHU BEHERA Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 20-Feb-2025 13:21:15

¶41

Page 3 of 3

Patitapaban Swain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Patitapaban Swain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Meher Agencies, Cuttack Vs State of Odisha

Rashmita Behera Vs State of Odisha

Gopinath Dalei @ Dalai Vs State of Orissa

Janaki Ballav Pattanaik Vs Chief General Manager, Msme, Bbsr.

Manorama Sanitary Vs Canara Bank, Arm Branch

Sabyasachi Mahakul Vs the State of Odisha