Orissa High Court
WP(C)/20080/2026 of BIKASH CHANDRA DEB Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 21 July 2026
of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.20080 of 2026 Bikash Chandra Deb …. Petitioner Mr. Avijit Patnaik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite parties Mr. Saswat Das, Additional Government Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.20080 of 2026
Bikash Chandra Deb
….
Petitioner
Mr. Avijit Patnaik, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
….
Opposite parties
Mr. Saswat Das, Additional Government Advocate
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
21.07.2026
01.
1. The instant writ petition is at the behest of the ex-lessee of a mine seeking a direction upon the authorities to issue transit/transport permission for transportation and sale of the manganese ores already extracted from the mines leased out to the petitioner.
2. It is not in dispute that the period of lease expired by efflux of time and the extracted minerals vested into the lessee for the purpose of removal and/or sale even after the expiration of a period of lease subject to the limitations in relation to the period provided under Rules 12(1)(gg) and 12(1)(hh) of the Minerals (Other than Atomic and Hydrocarbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016.
3. A writ petition was filed before the Hon’ble Apex Court by a common cause flagging a serious issue of illegal mining across the country including the State. Ultimately, the said writ petition was disposed of by making several observations as well as issuing the writ of mandamus upon the Government of Odisha to take immediate steps in terms of the provisions contained in the Act as well as in the Rules framed thereunder, yet the issue remained as to whether the said judgment would stand in the way of removing the minerals already extracted by the lessee during the period of the lease.
4. Several applications came to be filed in the docket of the Court in the said disposed of writ petition and the orders were passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court taking into account the vagaries of the ex-lessees and the minerals so extracted during the currency of the lease. The petitioner does not appear to be an exception to it as he approached the Hon’ble Apex Court with an Interlocutory Application seeking permission to remove the already extracted minerals/ores from the leased area and a plea was taken before the Hon’ble Apex Court that since the penalty is imposed upon the petitioner in terms of the said order, unless the petitioner is permitted to sell the same, it would not be in a position to meet the demand towards the penalty.
5. The Hon’ble Apex Court disposed of the said application filed by the petitioner directing the Government to make a joint inspection for the purpose of determining the quality of the iron ore as also the quantity and after the completion of the joint inspection, the petitioner shall be given a four months' time to remove the iron ore in question and shall also be permitted to sell the same but under the watchful gaze and the control of the officers of the State. It was further observed that the amount realized from the sale of the iron ore shall be adjusted against the amount of the penalty imposed upon the petitioner and the balance amount shall be paid within four weeks from the date of the said sale.
6. It is thus apparent from the tenet of the said order that the petitioner was permitted to sell the iron ore extracted from the mines with the conditions attached to it and thus, the prayer for removal of the manganese ore was impliedly refused. The order of the Hon’ble Apex Court categorically evinced that the State is within its competence and power to initiate proceedings and continue with the same for auctioning the right to the mines from the mine in question in accordance with law.
7. Obviously, the Hon’ble Apex Court restricted the prayer to the extent of iron ore and impliedly did not consider the prayer for the manganese ore. Once the Hon’ble Apex Court was approached for removal of the ore and an order being passed, it is not open to the litigant to bypass such forum and approach the High Court for a relief which could have been very well agitated in an application filed before the Supreme Court. Once the petitioner did not include all the claims which arose at the time of moving a Court, he is precluded from raising such claim in a subsequent proceeding by virtue of an embargo created under Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
8. We, thus, do not find any merit in the instant writ petition warranting interference as asked for nor justifying the reliefs so claimed therein.
9. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Harish Tandon)
Chief Justice
(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge
Sisira Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIRA KUMAR BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 23-Jul-2026 15:45:50 Signature Not Verified