AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
Heard Mr. Shamim Akhtar, Standing counsel (Mines) appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
a) “For quashing the memo no.1907/ Khannan, Bokaro, dated 06.08.2007 issued by respondent no.5, whereby and whereunder the concerned respondents has demanded a sum of Rs.6,27,84,264/- on account of royalty on the stock of coal of 545950.122 MT in respect of the year 2005-06.
b) For a writ declaring that royalty is to be paid only on the mineral dispatched and not on the basis of any other calculation.
c) For a declaration that the petitioner is not entitled to pay royalty on the stock shortage of coal which appears in the books of the company.”
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition was filed at the stage of issuance of notices to the petitioner. Subsequently, from the perusal of the counter-affidavit it appears that certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No.2 of 2009-10 has been initiate against the petitioner before the Certificate Officer, Dhanbad and accordingly, the petitioner has filed interlocutory application being I.A. No.729 of 2010 for stay of certificate proceeding.
Counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits that as a certificate proceeding has been initiated in Certificate Case No.2 of 2009-10 therefore the petitioner should be directed to appear before the Certificate Officer and this writ petition under Article 226 may not be entertained.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and considering the fact that after issuance of the impugned notice, the certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No.2 of 2009-10 has been initiated against the petitioner and accordingly, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition.
From the records of the case it is not clear as to whether any final order has been passed in Certificate Case No.2 of 2009-10 and counsel for the parties are also not aware about the fate of Certificate Case No.2 of 2009-10.
Considering the fact that huge revenue is involved in this case, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Certificate Officer in Certificate Case No.2 of 2009-10 if it is pending before the Certificate Officer, Dhanbad within a period of 4 weeks from today and the Certificate Officer, Dhanbad is directed to dispose of the matter within a period of six weeks thereafter after giving all the opportunities to the petitioner. The petitioner herein will be at liberty to raise all the issues before the Certificate Officer.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed.