M/S MAA MAHAMAYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED, v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
WPC/1210/2025 · 2026-03-15
Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 945 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 945 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2026:CGHC:12398-DB
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1210 of 2025 M/s Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act 1956, Having Its Registered Office At Industrial Ward, Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 493773 Through Its Authorized Signatory.
... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Mineral Resources Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation (Cmdc) Through Its Managing Director, Sector - 24, Office Campus, Block 7a, 3rd Floor, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation (Cmdc) Sector 24, Office Campus Block 7a, 3rd Floor, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Manoraj Singh, Mr. Rahul Ambast and Mr. Shotabdi Bagchi, Advocates For Respondent/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Govt. Advocate For Respondents/CMDC : Mr. Abhishek Sinha, Senior Advocate along VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.03.17 10:55:52 +0530
2 with Mr. Ankit Singhal, Ms. Jasleen K. Gulati, and Mr. Ashish Mittal, Advocates Hon'ble
Shri
Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble
Shri R
avindra Kumar Agrawal
, Judge
Order on Board Per
Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
16/03/2026
1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, M/s Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, challenging the legality and validity of the termination letter dated 01.01.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 – Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation (CMDC), whereby the Agreement dated 14.06.2021 executed between the petitioner and CMDC for the sale and dispatch of iron ore from Aridongri Iron Ore Mines situated at Village Kachhe, Tehsil Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh, has been terminated. The principal grievance raised by the petitioner is that the impugned termination has been effected arbitrarily and in violation of the contractual stipulations, particularly Clause 10(iv) of the Agreement, without issuance of a proper show cause notice and without affording the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing, thereby allegedly violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner, therefore, seeks quashment of the said termination letter along with all consequential actions arising therefrom.
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition claiming for the following reliefs:-
3
“I. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record relating to the case of the Petitioner. II. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside and quash the impugned termination letter dated 01.01.2025 (Annexure P-21) issued by CMDC, and received by the Petitioner on 19.01.2025, and all consequences thereof; III. That, this Hon’ble Court may grant any other relief in favour of the Petitioner, which it deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of Justice.”
3. After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the dispute resolution mechanism provided under Clause 20(v) of the Agreement dated 14.06.2021, which stipulates settlement of disputes through arbitration, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with the said arbitration clause.
4. Considering the aforesaid submission and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy available under Clause 20(v) of the Agreement by initiating appropriate arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.
5. Consequently, the interim relief granted earlier shall stand vacated. No
order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved