GMR, CHHATISGARH ENERGY LTD Vs. HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Das, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. He submits, his client took over mining operations in Talabira-I Coal Mine under vesting order dtd. 23/3/2015 made in exercise of power under sec. 6 of Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Second Ordinance, 2014. He submits, the ordinance received ratification in Parliament, to become Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015.

(2.) Impugned is order dtd. 18/4/2018 made by Collector, Sambalpur. By it there was direction upon his client to pay at ratio of 80:20 along with Hindalco (opposite party no.1), compensation and ex-gratia for removal of waste dumped on private land. He submits, the order is erroneous on face of it since, inspection made by the Tahasildar clearly reported the ratio to be the reverse between his client and Hindalco. He submits, private opposite parties had moved this Court earlier vide W.P.(C) no.5380 of 2016 disposed of by order dtd. 2/5/2016, pursuant to which impugned order was made by the Collector. He relies on sub-sec. (3) in sec. 14 to submit, Hindalco is responsible for accumulation of waste on private land since long before. His client entered into the picture in year 2015 as aforesaid. As such sub-sec. (3) in sec. 14 mandates prior liability to be met by the prior allottee.

(3.) Mr. Patnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of Hindalco. He draws attention to inspection report dtd. 10/10/2017 made by the Tahasildar. He demonstrates from the table giving land schedule and illegally dumped area, to show that dumped area by petitioner is 80% of the land area and as such the Tahasildar made obvious error in expressing view that his client should pay at ratio 80:20.