p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.20154 of 2026 Prasanna Kumar Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. Soumya Ranjan Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Ms. Aishwarya Dash, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 08.07.2026 01. 1. The present writ petition is filed with the following prayer(s):- “In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances this Hon’ble Court may be graciously be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to extend the time period of the lease by 81 days from 05.07.2026 for the completion of the quarrying activity, thereby allowing the petitioner to operate the quarry till 24.09.2026 as per the statutory framework of the Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016; And; be further pleased to pass any other order(s)/Direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court thinks fit and proper; And: for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner having participated in the auction, being declared highest bidder for Brahmanabasa Road Metal Quarry No.II p. 2 vide Sairat Case No.13/2020 applied for mining plan under Rule 28 of the Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016 (for short, “the OMMC Rules”) and also Environmental Clearance before the competent authorities. After statutory clearances being granted, a lease deed was executed between the petitioner and the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal on 30th March, 2024 for a period of five years in terms of Rule 43 of the said Rules. 2.1. After obtaining environment clearance from the State Pollution Control Board, Odisha, consent order was issued in his favour on 24th February, 2025 for excavation/quarrying of Black Stone (Road Metal). The petitioner could operate the quarry in pursuance of lease deed executed with the Mining Officer, Dhenkanal. The statutory compliance took considerable period of eighty-one days from (8th September, 2025 to 4th December, 2025). Due to delay in official process, attributable to the opposite parties, the petitioner was restrained to commence the quarry operation. 2.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the period for which the petitioner could not operate the quarry cannot be attributed to him and, therefore, he fervently prays for a direction to the opposite parties to extend the period of lease for a period of eighty-one days. 3. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State submitted that the writ Court should not show indulgence by acceding to the prayer so made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, it is submitted that the Government is competent to relax any provisions of the OMMC Rules invoking Rule 64 thereof. p. 3 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State. 5. This Court is taken to Rule 64 of the Odisha Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016, which reads as follows: “64.Power of the Government to relax the rules.— The Government may, in the interest of mineral development, relax any of the provisions of these rules in deserving cases in such manner as they deem proper.” 5.1. With the aforesaid background and in consideration of the submissions advanced by the counsel for the respective parties, it is deemed apposite to reserve liberty to the petitioner to approach the Government-competent authority with comprehensive representation within a period of fifteen days from date. On such eventuality, the competent authority shall consider such representation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and take a decision invoking provisions of Rule 64 of the OMMC Rules. It is expected that a reasoned order shall be passed within the period stipulated as above and communicated to the petitioner forthwith. 5.2. As an abundant caution, it is clarified that nothing stated above on facts be construed as an expression of any opinion of this Court on the merit of the matter. The appropriate authority is free to take independent decision on the merit of the matter on the basis of the material placed on record before him by the petitioner. p. 4 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition along with pending Interlocutory Application (s), if any, stands disposed of. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge S. Behera/Sisira