TATA STEEL LIMITED Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On a doubt raised by the Court whether identical issue is pending before the Hon'ble Division Bench, Mr. Tapesh Kr. Singh, the learned counsel for the respondentMADA states that the issue raised in the present writ petition is different from the writ petition preferred by the SAIL vide W.P.(C) No.5585 of 2015. The learned counsel for the respondentMADA states that besides, challenge to demand raised by the respondentMADA, SAIL has also challenged vires of the Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 and Jharkhand Municipal (Amendment) Act, 2015. On the above understanding, I proceed to hear the matter.

(2.) At the outset, Mr. Raju Ramachandran, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that original demand raised by the respondent is about Rs. 36 crores excluding, interest and the petitioner is apprehending coercive steps by the respondents. The petitioner seeking interim protection is ready to pay Rs. 18 crores by way of demand draft however, the final calculation would remain subject to adjudication. It is submitted that the demand notice dated 20.11.2015 has been issued without a basis for assessment and besides the fact that a question of jurisdiction is involved in the matter, the impugned demand raised by the respondentMineral Area Development Authorityrespondent no. 3 is patently illegal and unenforceable. Per contra, Mr. Tapesh Kr. Singh, the learned counsel for the respondentMADA submits that in view of the amended provision of Mineral Area Development Authority (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015, the demand notice dated 20.11.2015 is perfectly legal and valid. Issue notice.

(3.) Mr. Binod Singh, the learned S.C. (L&C) appears and waives service of notice upon respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Tapesh Kr. Singh, the learned counsel appears and waives service of notice upon respondent nos. 3 and 4. Considering the legal issues raised in the present proceeding, it is hereby ordered that the respondents shall not take coercive step against the petitioner till, next four weeks. The petitioner shall make payment of Rs. 18 crores on or before 15.12.2015 through a demand draft drawn in favour of MADA however, the final liability, if any, payable by the petitioner shall be subject to adjudication. It is further ordered that till the next date of hearing, the respondents shall not encash the demand draft. Post the matter on 06.01.2016.