LexCENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD. versus STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD. v. ST A TE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS. SEPTEMBER I, 2005 B [C.K. THAKKER AND P.K. BALASUBRAMANY AN, JJ.] Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914-Section 60- Direction to Government company engaged in coal mining for payment of surface rent in coal bearing mining areas by State Government-Plea that C recovery of rent not sustainable-Writ petition, dismisml of, on ground of alternative remedy of filing appeal-LP A on the ground that the issue in question decided by Division Bench in earlier decision-Dismissal of LP A on ground of alternative remedy-Correctness of-Held : Order directing payment of rent is subject to appeal under section 60-More so under sections D 6 and 7 of the 1972 Act, State Government has pov:er to make demand of rent-Hence, order allowing alternative remedy of filing appeals justified- Furthermore, in the earlier decision on Division Bench point regarding availability of alternative remedy ·neither raised nor considered-Company granted liberty to file appeals under 1914 Act-Coking Coal Mines E (Nationalisation). Act, 1972-Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 195.7-Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973. Appellant-Goverr "lent Company is engaged in extracting, selling and distributing coal. For mining purposes it acquired land through Central Government and rights over colliery and mining area. State F Government demanded payment of surface rent in coal bearing mining areas under Bihar and Oissa Pubilc Demands, recovery Act, 1914 in possession of the appellant and Certificate Officer initiated proceedings against the appellant for recovery of rent. Company contended that the proceedings were against Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and G Development) Act, 1957 and also the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973; and that the 1914 Act was not applicable to the present case. Certificate Officer held the Company liable to pay rent. Appellant filed writ petition. Single Judge of High Court dismissed the petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy under the 1914 Act. Appellant H filed LPA challenging the order on the ground that the point in issue was 1128 CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD. v. STATE OF JHARKHAND I 129 concluded by decision of Division Bench in Managing Director National A Coal Development Corp. case that State Government had no authority to demand surface rent. Division Bench upheld the order of Single Judge and dismissed the L.P.A. Hence the present appeal. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD : 1.1. In view of the provisions of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 and also the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972, the Certificate proceedings could not have been initiated under the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914. But the action was taken under the 1914 Act and the appellant- Company was directed to make payment. The said order is subject to appeal under Section 60 of the 1914 Act. A reading of the order passed B c by the Certificate Officer makes it clear that before taking the action, an opinion of the Advocate General of the State of Bihar was sought by the D respondent who referred to sections 6 and 7ofthe 1972 Act and observed that the State Government had power to make demand of rent from the appellant-Company. Therefore, the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High Court did not commit an error of law in dismissing the petitions and appeals by allowing the appellant to avail of an alternative E remedy of filing appeals, and thus, the orders do not suffer from any infirmity. f 1133-C, D, E, Ff 1.2. The Division Bench of High Court rightly observed that the powers of the Appellate Authority under the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 are very wide and the appellant may raise all contentions including the contention as to the jurisdiction of the State Government and/or its officers in initiating Certificate Proceedings against the Company; and that in the decision in National Coal Development Corporation case the contention regarding alternative remedy was neither raised nor considered nor a finding had been recorded thereon. Therefore, the appellant-Company is granted liberty to approach the Appellate Authority by filing appeals under the Bihar & Orissa Demands R
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.