RANCHI, India, March 4 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Jan. 3:
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. At the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we take this petition for final disposal.
3. This petition challenges the order dated 25th August, 2025, made by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Sahebganj, in Revenue Miscellaneous Case No.17 of 2024-25, raising a demand by way of penalty of Rs. 1,77,92,892.00 towards alleged illegal extraction of minor mineral beyond the leasehold area.
4. The petitioner has assailed the impugned order, primarily on the following three grounds:-
a. The Deputy Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to make such an order, given the decision of this Court in the case of M/s Bhagwan Stone Works vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors., W.P.(C) No.322 of 2025 decided on 15th July, 2025;
b. The proceedings which led to the issuance of the impugned order were initiated under Rule 11(5) of the Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 which was declared as ultra vires by this Court in the case of M/s Aditya Enterprises vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., W.P.(C) No.6788 of 2023 decided on 22nd July, 2024; and
c. The impugned order is based on an alleged inspection conducted without notice and, consequently, behind the petitioner's or its representatives' backs. Thus, there was a patent failure of natural justice.
5. The record in this case suggests that the impugned order is based on an inspection conducted on 29th April, 2023. There is no record of any notice being served upon the petitioner or its representatives. The principles of natural justice would require that a notice of the inspection be given, and once an inspection report is prepared, a copy of the same be furnished so that the petitioner can offer its comments on the same.
6. Issues of constitutional validity or ultra vires can always be kept open, but they need not be decided in this petition if it can be disposed of on the ground of a failure of natural justice in this particular instance.
7. Since we are satisfied that there was a failure of natural justice, we quash and set aside the impugned order on this ground by granting the respondents liberty to initiate fresh action if they so choose in accordance with the law by adhering to the principles of natural justice and fair play. All contentions regarding the power of the Deputy Commissioner and the vires of Rule 54(6) of the Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 are kept open to be decided at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding should the same be warranted.
8. This petition is disposed of with liberty in the above terms and without any order for costs.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=I1mmm2bl4r4EREhYK63Kv70CpMp4qxp2Brh6KG5N3v2vEmwRg1DirkG8fonVGH4I&caseno=WPC/272/2026&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010003552026&state_code=7&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
