COLLECTOR Vs. BHARAT CHANDRA BHUYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The seminal point that arises for our consideration is as to whether the Court pronouncing a judgment has, for whatever reason, missed to take into consideration a decision of the Supreme Court taking a contrary view on a point covered by the said judgment, constitute a ground for review of the judgment.

(2.) This petition has been filed by the Collector, Cuttack and others seeking review of the order dated 09.10.2012 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.11271 of 2012.

(3.) The short facts of the case are that the Tahasildar, Cuttack issued a notice on 7.4.2012 for settlement of sand sairat source in respect of six sand sources under Cuttack Tahasil. The opposite party submitted his bid in respect of Baulakuda sand sairat source corresponding to Sairat Case No.72/12/2013 for an area of Ac.2.00. The upset price was Rs.2 lakhs. Three bidders participated in the auction. The opposite party was the second highest bidder. Since the first bidder failed to deposit the offered price, the EMD of the said bidder was forfeited. Thereafter, the sairat was settled in favour of opposite party for an amount of Rs.2,03,500/-. Accordingly, the opposite party deposited an amount of Rs.80,000/- with the Tahasildar, Cuttack on 9.5.2012. He gave an undertaking to deposit the balance amount within seven days. The opposite party has also deposited an amount of Rs.4070/- towards income tax and Rs.20,000/- which are 10% of the upset price as security value. After deposit, he requested the Tahasildar, Cuttack to execute the agreement and accept the balance amount. But then the Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack issued a letter on 14.5.2012 to the Sub-Collector, Cuttack directing him to suspend the order in terms of the order dated 26.3.2012 passed in W.P.(C) No.14574 of 2010. Being aggrieved, he filed a writ petition, i.e., W.P.(C) No.11271 of 2012 praying, inter alia, to quash the said letter. By order dated 9.10.2012, a Division Bench of this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the competent authority to execute necessary lease agreement as per Rule 36 of the Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.