Sss Traders vs. State Of Odisha

Held

The Court noted the submissions made by the learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State. Based on these submissions, the Court did not deem it necessary to issue any separate or fresh directions to the opposite parties. Instead, the Court observed that if the petitioner faced any difficulty in transporting lawfully extracted sand, even after paying royalty, GST, and other government dues, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the concerned Tahasildar. The Tahasildar was implicitly directed to address the petitioner's grievances in accordance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of with this observation. The Court did not explicitly decide on the entitlement to a permit but provided a procedural recourse for the petitioner to seek redressal if difficulties persisted.

Facts

The petitioner, SSS Traders, through its proprietor Sasmita Behera, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the opposite parties (State of Odisha) to issue a necessary permit for transporting sand outside the State. The petitioner argued that the sand was lawfully extracted from a licensed quarry, with royalty and GST paid. The petitioner relied on a circular dated 21.12.2019, issued by the Government of Odisha, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, which followed a Supreme Court judgment. The State, represented by the learned Addl. Government Advocate, referred to clause-3 of the same office memorandum dated 21.12.2019, which directed Collectors to allow transportation of lawfully extracted sand outside the State, provided proof of lawful excavation and payment of royalty and GST is produced.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a permit for transporting sand outside the State of Odisha, given that the sand has been lawfully extracted and all applicable dues, including royalty and GST, have been paid? (Question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and application of the circular dated 21.12.2019 and the Supreme Court's judgment in State of Gujarat v. Jayeshbhai Kanjibhai Kalathiya). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that despite the circular dated 21.12.2019, which was issued in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment, they were not being allowed to transport sand outside the State. They contended that they had lawfully extracted the sand from a duly licensed quarry and had paid royalty and GST, thus fulfilling all requirements for obtaining a transport permit. Revenue's (State's) Contention: The learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State referred to clause-3 of the office memorandum dated 21.12.2019. They submitted that the State Government, in compliance with the apex Court's judgment, had directed Collectors to allow transportation of lawfully extracted sand outside the State. However, they emphasized that the petitioner would be required to produce proof of lawful excavation and payment of royalty and GST upon demand by the opposite parties.