Salasar Steel And Power Ltd. V. Union Of India and South Eastern Coalfields Limited (S E C L) and State Of Chhattisgarh

WPC/3186/2017

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Salasar Steel And Power Ltd., which filed a writ petition against the Union of India, South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL), and the State of Chhattisgarh concerning the contributions to the District Mineral Fund (DMF). The petitioner argued that the contributions should not be retrospective. The court referenced a similar case, Vardhman Textiles Limited Vs. Union of India & Others, where it was decided that contributions to the DMF for coal, lignite, and sand for stowing should be made from the date the rates were prescribed by the Central Government or from the date the DMF was established by the State Government, whichever is later. In this instance, the DMF in Chhattisgarh was established on 22-12-2015, thus setting the date from which contributions are due.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 697761 (HC-CHHATTISGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Vardhman Textiles Limited Vs. Union of India & Others
• Laws Referred To: Indian Companies Act. 1956, MMDR Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KESHARWANI; PRASUN BHADURI
• Assessee Lawyers: GURPREET CHAWLA
• Keywords: Mining lease; Prospecting licence-cum-mining lease; Retrospective operation; District Mineral Fund; Contributions
• Section: 48; 46; 47

Judgement Text

"1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No.3186 of 2017 M/s. Salasar Steel And Power Ltd. A Duly Registered Company Under The Indian Companies Act. 1956 , Having Its Registered Office At 1 St Floor , Bhatia Complex, Opp. Raj Kumar College G E Road Raipur Chhattisgarh Pin 492001 Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Sushil Kumar Malani Aged About 70 Years S/o Bilas Rai Malani R / O H. No. 69, Near Gayatri Hospital Rohinipuram Raipur, 492007 Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India Through Its Secretary Ministry Of Coal A Wing Shastri Bhawan Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road New Delhi - 110001 . 2. South Eastern Coalfields Limited ( S E C L ) , Through Its General Manager ( Sales And Marketing ) Head Of Department A Subsidiary Of Coal India Limited , A Miniratna Company Seepat Road , Bilaspur Chhattisgarh . 495006 3. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department Of Mines & Mineral Development Mahanadi Mantralaya Naya Raipur Post Office & Police Station Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh - 492002 ---- Respondents For Petitioner: Ms Gurpreet Kaur Chawla, Advocate For Respondent No.1 / Union of India: - Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No.3 / State: - Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 28/11/2017 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that issue raised in this writ petition is covered by order dated 24.10.2017 passed in Writ Petition (C) No.82 of 2017 in the matter of Vardhman Textiles Limited Vs. Union of India & Others and other connected matters in which this Court has observed as under in paragraphs No.4 to 10:- 2 “4. In the aforesaid case Federation of Indian Mineral Industries (supra), the Supreme Court has held as under: - “46. Having considered the issues raised by the petitioners and by the learned Additional Solicitor General in different perspectives, we hold: (i) Merely because the DMFs have been established or are deemed to have been established from a date prior to the issuance of the relevant notifications does not make their operation retrospective. (ii) In any event, the establishment of the DMFs (assuming the establishment is retrospective) from 12th January, 2015 does not prejudicially affect any holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease. (iii) In view of the failure of the Central Government to prescribe the rate on 12th January, 2015 at which contributions are required to be made to the DMF, the contributions to the DMF cannot be insisted upon with effect from 12th January, 2015. Fixing the maximum rate of contribution to the DMF is insufficient compliance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – I v. Vatika Township Private Limited1. (iv) 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 17th September, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government. (v) 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 coal, lignite and sand for stowing with effect from 20th October, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government or with effect from the date on which the DMF was established by the State Government by a notification, whichever is later. (vi) The notification dated 31st August, 2016 issued by the Central Government is invalid and is struck down being ultra vires the rule making power of the Central Government under the MMDR Act. 47. We fervently hope the State Governments recognize their responsibilities and utilize the contributions to the District Mineral Funds quickly and for the object for which they have been established, particularly since the amounts involved are huge. 48. We grant time till 31st December, 2017 to those holders of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum- mining lease who have not made the full contribution to the District Mineral Funds to pay the contribution, failing which they will be liable to make the contribution with 1 (2015) 1 SCC 1 3 interest at 15% per annum from the due date. We also make it clear that in the event any holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease has mistakenly made contributions to the District Mineral Fund from a date prior to the date that we have determined, such a holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease shall not be entitled to any refund but may adjust the contribution against future contributions, without the benefit of any interest.” 5. A careful perusal would show that contributions to the DMF are required to made by the holder of a mining lease or a prospecting license-cum-mining lease in the case of coal, lignite and sand for stowing and it will be with effect from 20th of October, 2015 when the rates were prescribed by the Central Government or with effect from the date on which the DMF was established by the State Government by a notification, whichever is later. 6. Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned State counsel, would submit that the DMF was established by the State Government in Chhattisgarh by a notification which was issued on 22-12-2015, therefore contributions will be payable by the petitioners with effect from 22-12-2015. 7. In view of the above, the writ petitions stand finally disposed of in terms of paragraphs 46, 47 and 48 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Federation of Indian Mineral Industries (supra) and contributions will be payable by the petitioners with effect from 22-12-2015. No order as to cost(s). W.P.(C)No.2316/2016 8. Mr. Sumesh Bajaj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that in this case the mineral involved is minor mineral stone / gitti for which contribution is payable, therefore, the contribution is payable from 23-3- 2016, as the Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 were amended. 9. Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned State counsel, submits 4 that so far as this minor mineral stone / gitti is concerned, contribution will be payable from 23-3-2016. 10. The statement is taken on record and it is ordered accordingly. (2) Accepting the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of in similar terms of Vardhman Textiles Limited (supra). No order as to costs. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L "