DEBIDUTTA MOHANTY versus RANJAN KUMAR PATTNAIK & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 2 S.C.R. 72 · Decided: 03-03-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
72
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 2 S.C.R.
DEBIDUTTA MOHANTY
v.
RANJAN KUMAR PATTNAIK & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 4939 of 2022)
MARCH 03, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016 – r. 51(7) –
Auction was to be made for grant of lease as per the Orissa Minor
Minerals Concession Rules – One of the requirement of the auction
notice was that the bidder was required to submit a solvency
certificate issued by the Revenue Officer – The respondent no.1
participated in the tender process and submitted his application
along with the solvency certificate issued by the Tehsildar – The
solvency certificate was issued despite the specific order passed by
the Sub-collector stating that a solvency certificate was to be issued
in the name of the ‘Trust’ – However, Tehsildar issued the solvency
certificate in favour of the respondent no.1 individually – Collector
cancelled the lease in favour of the respondent no.1 – High Court
set aside the order passed by the Collector cancelling the lease
deed in favour of respondent no.1 – Before the Supreme Court, the
respondent no.1 contended that the solvency certificate issued in
the favour of respondent no.1 was a mistake – On appeal, held: In
the present case the Sub-Collector specifically directed not to issue
the solvency certificate in favour of respondent no.1 herein in his
individual capacity and specifically directed to issue the certificate
in the name of Trust – Under the circumstances it cannot be said
that the solvency certificate was issued in favour of respondent
no.1 in his individual capacity by mistake – It appears that the
respondent no.1 deliberately and willfully obtained the solvency
certificate in his own name though the property belonged to the
Trust and the solvency certificate was required to be issued in the
name of the Trust – He misused/used the solvency certificate for his
own benefit illegally – Bid using solvency certificate by respondent
no.1 in his own name was non-est and void ab initio – Lease in his
favour was rightly cancelled – Impugned judgment of the High Court
set aside.
[2023] 2 S.C.R. 72
72
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
73
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. So far as the finding recorded by the High Court
that the order passed by the Collector dated 24.03.2021 cancelling
the lease deed was without authority under the law inasmuch as
the competent authority to cancel the lease deed under Rule 51(7)
of the Rules, 2016 would be Tehsildar is concerned, it is required
to be noted that the Rule 51(7) shall be applicable in case of
breach of any condition of the lease deed. The present case is
not a case of breach of any condition of the lease deed, but a case
of producing invalid solvency certificate at the time of submission
of the bid. Therefore, Rule 51(7) shall not be applicable at all to
the facts of the case at hand. It is also required to be noted that in
fact Collector passed the order dated 24.03.2021 pursuant to the
directions issued by the High Court directing the Collector to
take an appropriate decision on the representation/(s) made by
the appellant. Under the circumstances the High Court has
materially erred in holding that the order dated 24.03.2021 passed
by the Collector cancelling the lease deed was without authority
under the law. [Para 7.1, 7.2][80-E-G]
2. In the present case the Sub-Collector, Athagarh
specifically directed not to issue the solvency certificate in favour
of respondent no.1 herein in his individual capacity and specifically
directed to issue the certificate in the name of Trust. Under the
circumstances it cannot be said that the original solvency certificate
dated 07.12.2017 was issued in favour of respondent no.1 in his
individual capacity by mistake. It appears that the respondent
no.1 deliberately and willfully obtained the solvency certificate in
his own name though the property belonged to the Trust and the
solvency certificate was required to be issued in the name of the
Trust. He misused/used the solvency certificate dated 07.12.2017
for his own benefit illegally and submitted the same along with
his bid and on the basis of the said solvency certificate he got the
lease bid. Under the circumstances, the bid by using the solvency
certificate dated 07.12.2017 by respondent no.1 was non-est and
void ab initio and therefore, the lease in his favour on the basis of
such solvency certificate was rightly cancelled by the Collector. [
Para 8][81-D-F]
DEBIDUTTA MOHANTY v. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.