Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31032 of 2019
Petitioner :- M/S Associate Commerce Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Malhotra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Per: Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for all the respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
“ (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 04.12.2018 passed by the respondent No.1 in Appeal No.26 (R)ACS/M/2018, as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No.2, to take a decision on the show cause notice dated 22.12.2017 within a stipulated period of time.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to allow the petitioner to sell the mineral stored on his site and direct the respondent No.2 to issue Form-C to the petitioner.
(iv) Mould and grant any other suitable writ order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances, the case.
(v) Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.”
3. Facts as contained in the writ petition are that a show-cause notice dated 22.12.2017 (Annexure No.3) by which the petitioner was restrained from storing and selling minerals pursuant to the license granted to him which was valid upon 29.10.2019. Challenging the show cause notice dated 22.12.2017, the petitioner preferred an appeal provided under Rule 15 of the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2002. The aforesaid appeal was rejected by the State-Government vide order dated 4.12.2018 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) by which the State Government refused to interfere with the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner. It is further stated that after the dismissal of the appeal, when the petitioner appeared before the second respondent with relevant records, the second respondent orally observed that since the matter has already been decided by the State Government vide order dated 4.12.2018 by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the show cause notice was dismissed, hence no further order is required to be passed.
4. It is argued by Sri Ashish Melhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid stand taken by the second respondent is per-se illegal, hence a mandamus be issued to the second respondent-District Magistrate/District Officer Fatehpur to pass appropriate orders in the matter after examining relevant records which the petitioner was directed to be produced before him in response to the show-cause notice.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being finally disposed of at the admission stage itself.
6. From perusal of the record, it is clear that a show-cause notice dated 22nd December, 2017 was issued by the second respondent to the petitioner by which purchase, sale and storage of sand/morum was restrained and the petitioner was directed to produce purchase register, Form MM-11 etc. before him within a period of one week. Against the show-cause notice, the appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the State-Government as provided under Rule 15 of Rules, 2002 and the said appeal was rejected by the State Government. Now after the decision taken by the State Government, the petitioner wants to place the aforesaid document before the second respondent pursuant to the show cause notice dated 22.12.2017.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances as narrated above, we dispose of this writ petition permitting the petitioner file a fresh representation/reply appending thereto relevant papers/documents and other materials before second respondent-District Magistrate/District Officer, Fatehpur along with certified copy of this order within a period for three weeks from today. If such representation is filed by petitioner within the period stipulated hereinabove before second respondent, the second respondent is directed to decide the same by a speaking and reasoned order strictly in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of such representation/reply by the petitioner before him.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order date: 26.9.2019 saqlain