Disposed¶25

M/S Aruni Stone Crusher and Transport Services Private Limited, Jajpur v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Jan 2026WP(C)/34056/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court Cuttack WP(C) 34056/2025 disposed 06.01.2026; quarry permit Tahasildar Gondia Touzi Misc. Case 98 of 2020-21; demand Rs.27,24,836 royalty EMF DMF TCS surface rent dead rent; Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules 2016; Mining Officer Dhenkanal representation 12.08.2025 Annexure-5 pending; direction to decide within two weeks; East Coast Railways Khurda Road ballast supply contracts; writ of mandamus; merits not examined.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal (opposite party No.4) to take a decision on the representation dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure-5), if not already disposed of, within two weeks from communication of the order; petitioner permitted to communicate the order; the decision to be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. ¶25

M/S Aruni Stone Crusher and Transport Services Private Limited, Jajpur Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal (opposite party No.4) for early consideration and disposal of the petitioner's representation dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure-5) seeking permission to deposit the demanded dues, so as to enable the petitioner to execute the East Coast Railways, Khurda Road works.

¶21

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal-opposite party No.4 to take a decision on the representation dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure-5), if not disposed of in the meanwhile, within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order; the petitioner is at liberty to communicate the order to the Mining Officer, and the decision taken is to be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶25

Key takeaways

As an abundant precaution, the Court made it clear that it has not gone into the merit of the representation filed before the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal-opposite party No.4, and none of its observations should be construed as an opinion in that regard.obiter¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WP(C) No.34056 of 2025 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; coram: Hon'ble Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Raman; order dated 06.01.2026) - disposed. M/s. Aruni Stone Crusher and Transport Services Private Limited had been granted a quarry permit by the Tahasildar, Gondia (Order dated 24.08.2021 in Touzi Misc. Case No.98 of 2020-21) after obtaining Environment Clearance (19.12.2020) and approval of mining plan (16.07.2021); a demand of Rs.27,24,836/- towards royalty, EMF, DMF, TCS, Surface Rent and Dead Rent under the Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016 remained undeposited. To execute fresh East Coast Railways, Khurda Road contracts dated 17.06.2025, 09.07.2025 and 04.08.2025, the petitioner applied on 12.08.2025 (Annexure-5) to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal for permission to deposit the demanded amount, but no decision was taken. The Court, perceiving no benefit in keeping the petition pending, disposed of it by directing opposite party No.4 to decide the representation within two weeks of communication of the order, expressly without entering into its merits.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.34056 of 2025

¶2

M/s. Aruni Stone Crusher and …. Petitioners Transport Services Private Limited and another

¶3

Mr. Pravat Kumar Muduli, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha and others

¶6

…. Opposite parties Mr. Saswat Das, AGA

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No.

06.01.2026

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite parties.

¶15

In order to execute works entrusted by the East Coast Railways, Khurda Road an application, dated 31.07.2020, was filed for grant of quarry permit by the petitioner. The Environment Clearance from the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority and mining plan could be received from the authorities concerned by the petitioner on 19.12.2020 and 16.07.2021 respectively. Accordingly, the Tahasildar, Gondia vide Order dated 24.08.2021 in Touzi Misc. Case No.98 of 2020-21 allowed the application and granted quarry permit and directed the petitioner to deposit Government dues as required under the Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016.

¶16

2.1. Even though there was delay in according necessary permits by the competent authorities, despite no fault can be attributed to the petitioner, a demand to the tune of Rs.27,24,836/- towards

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

royalty, EMF, DMF, TCS, Surface Rent and Dead Rent was made by the Tahasildar.

¶19

2.2. In order to execute the subsequent works entrusted by the Railways by contracts dated 17.06.2025, 09.07.2025 and 04.08.2025, an application dated 12.08.2025 was submitted to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal to allow the petitioner to deposit aforesaid demanded amount.

¶20

2.3. Though considerable period has been elapsed, the authority concerned has not yet taken decision to enable the petitioner to deposit said amount as demanded by the Tahasidar so that quarry permit can be granted in its favour.

¶21

2.4. Sri Pravat Kumar Muduli, learned Advocate submitted that the petitioner has come up before this Court with limited grievance that a writ of mandamus be issued to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal for early consideration and disposal of the representation dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure-5) so as to enable the petitioner to execute the works entrusted by the East Coast Railways, Khurda Road smoothly, or else the business of the petitioner would suffer irreparably.

¶22

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the representation dated 12.08.2025 stated to be pending before the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal-opposite party no.4, can be considered, if it is not disposed of as yet. 4. It is found from the record that East Coast Railways has issued contracts for supply of ballasts as stated above and the petitioner by application dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure-5) addressed to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal sought permission to deposit the amount as demanded by the Tahasidar so that it can operate the

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

quarry inasmuch as environment clearance has already been issued in favour of the petitioner for five years.

¶25

4.1. Having taken note of contents of the petition and the documents enclosed thereto, it is perceived that no benefit would enure to either of the parties by keeping the writ petition pending. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal-opposite party No.4 to take a decision on the representation dated 12.08.2025 vide Annexure-5, if not disposed of in the meanwhile, within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order. The petitioner at liberty to communicate this order to the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal-opposite party No.4. The decision taken in this regard be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶26

For abundant precaution, we hereby made it clear that we have not gone into the merit of the representation filed before the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal-opposite party No.4. Therefore, none of the observation be construed as opinion in this regard.

¶27

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶28

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶29

MRS/Laxmikant

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jan-2026 11:58:24

¶32

Page 3 of 3

M/S Aruni Stone Crusher and Transport Services Private Limited, Jajpur v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aruni Stone Crusher and Transport Services Private Limited, Jajpur v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ami Saunta Vs State of Odisha

Arpan Kumar Pujhari Vs State of Odisha

Sujata Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Kunti Sahu Vs State of Odisha

M/S Mohanty Pharmaceuticals Vs Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal)

Kal Kmc Pp No 04 Nabra, Mayurbhanj Vs the State Tax Officer, Mayurbhanj Circle, Balasore