Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23401 of 2019 Petitioner :- Noora Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to :-
(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 28.06.2019 (Annexure-4) passed by the respondent no. 2;
(ii) issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iii) award cost of the petition to the petitioner.
The grievance of the petitioner is that although he along with respondent no. 3 is the co-sharer of plot no. 865A situate in village- Issapur Khurgan, Pargana, Tehsil- Kairana, District- Shamli, hereinafter referred to as the disputed plot, which has not been partitioned by metes and bounds but the respondent no. 2 has illegally granted a mining permit in favour of the respondent no. 3 under Rule 52A of U. P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 in respect of the disputed plot and hence, the same is liable to be cancelled.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 and 2 submitted that it will be appropriate if the petitioner is directed to move an application/representation raising all his grievances before respondent no. 2 and a corresponding direction be issued to him to consider and decide the petitioner's application/representation within a specified period.
In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an application/representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent no. 2 along with the certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today.
In case any such application/representation is filed by the petitioner before respondent no. 2 within the period indicated hereinabove, he shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of filing of such application/representation after affording opportunity of hearing to the respondent no. 3.
It will be open to the respondent no. 2 to examine the effect of the status quo order passed by the revenue court in the suit filed by the petitioner against the respondent no. 3 while deciding the petitioner's application/representation.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019/KS