IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.26487 of 2024 Jyotshna Jena …. Petitioner Mr. M. Kanungo, Sr. Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.P. Behera, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 27.10.2025 09. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. Kanungo, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner so also Mr. P.P. Behera, learned ASC for the State-Opposite Parties. 3. Despite giving sufficient Opportunity, the State has failed to file the Counter Affidavit till date. 4. A prayer has been made in the writ petition to quash the notice dated 02.09.2024, so also the certificate proceeding vide Certificate Case No.5 of 2024 under Annexure-18 on the grounds detailed in the writ petition. 5. So far as the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel before this Court, which was recorded vide order dated 01.05.2025, Paragraph Nos.1 to 3 of the said order being relevant are reproduced below:- p. 2 “1. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner challenges the notice dated 02.09.2024 and initiation of certificate proceeding vide Certificate Case No.05 of 2024. It is submitted though Annexure-18 dated 02.09.2024 is notice in the Certificate Case No.05 of 2024 the challenge is to the lack of jurisdiction of the authority; Tahasildar, Dharmasala passing the original order dated 27.03.2024 pertaining to sairat case No.39/2015- 16, Dankari BSQ No.1/4. It is submitted that post amendment of the Minor Minerals Concession Rules, the Tahasildar lacks jurisdiction and the Mining Officer, Jajpur is the competent authority having jurisdiction. Whole process of recovery and demand has been made with a misconceived authority of the Tahasildar. 2. Learned Senior Counsel then refers to the order dated 31.01.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.25529 of 2024 wherein the present petitioner has challenged the demand notice dated 13.04.2023 on the ground that the same is illegal and without jurisdiction having been done by the Tahasildar not having jurisdiction. 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate in response submits that he shall obtain written instruction and if so advised may file counter. Copy of the order dated 31.01.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.25529 of 2024 is served on the learned Additional Government Advocate, is also taken on record.” p. 3 6. Similarly, Paragraph Nos.2 & 3 of order dated 28.07.2025 , being relevant, are reproduced below:- “2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, the subject matter of the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court passed in WP(C) No.24005 of 2024 so also other matters. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner hands up a website copy of order of this Court passed in WP(C) No.24005 of 2024 after handing over a copy of the same to Mr. Nayak, learned AGA for the State, who prays for a short adjournment to take instruction.” 7. Mr. Behera, learned ASC submits, as per the instruction received, the only difference of the present writ petition vis-à-vis the order passed in W.P.(C) No.24005 of 2024 dated 25.09.2024 is that, in the said case, the division Bench set aside the demand notice dated 13.04.2023, based on which the Requisition in Form-2, as prescribed under the OPDR Act, 1962, was submitted by the Certificate Holder. But so far as the present case of the Petitioner, at her instance, W.P.(C) No.25529 of 2024 is still pending for adjudication, even though a similar prayer has been made in the said writ petition, as had been made in W.P.(C) No.19576 of 2023. 8. Hence, recording such submission made by learned ASC, the prayer made in the writ petition stands allowed. p. 4 9. Accordingly, the certificate proceeding initiated against the Petitioner vide Certificate Case No.5 of 2024, now pending in the Court of Collector & District Magistrate-Cum-Certificate Officer, Jajpur is hereby set aside. 10. The writ petition stands disposed of keeping the point of law open, if any, involved in the present lis, be raising and adjudicating before the appropriate forum at appropriate stage. 11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application as per rules. 12. Needless to mention here that this order shall not be a bar for the State to re-initiate the certificate proceeding in accordance with law, if any, which shall be subject to final outcome of W.P.(C) No.25529 of 2024. Banita (S.K. MISHRA) JUDGE Designation: SR. STENOGRAPHER