Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27572 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Vaishy Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madan Lal Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with a prayer to issue a mandamus directing the Commissioner, Vindhyanchal Mandal, Mirzapur to decide the stay application of the petitioner in pending appeal, which was preferred by him, number as Appeal No.102 of 2019 ( Ramesh Chand Vaishy Vs. District Magistrate, Sonbhadra and others) filed under Rule 77 of Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 with further prayer to issue a mandamus directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner in pursuance to the auction notice issued by the respondent no.5/Sub Divisional Officer/Assistant Collector, Tehsil Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra.
The facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that mining lease was granted in favour of the petitioner by the District Magistrate,Sonbhadra/respondent no.3 in the year 2016 for a period of ten years. A notice dated 28.11.2018 was issued by the respondent no.3 stating therein that certain illegal mining was found in the inspection conducted on 25.11.2018. The petitioner submitted its reply on 28.12.2018 denying the allegations made in the notice.
It is stated in the writ petition that a recovery certificate was issued by the respondent no.3 against the petitioner on 24.6.2017. The petitioner submitted its reply on 11.7.2017. In this regard petitioner also filed a writ petition before this Court being Writ C No.45926 of 2017 (M/s Ravisha Stone Product Vs. State of U.P. and others). The said writ petition was finally decided by a coordinate Bench of this Court directing the petitioner to file his objection within ten days and thereafter the respondent no.3 was directed to proceed further in the matter and pass appropriate orders. Subsequent to the same an order dated 19.1.2019 was passed by the respondent no.3/District Magistrate,Sonbhadra. Against the order dated 19.1.2019 passed by the respondent no.3 the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Vindhyanchal Mandal, Mirzapur along-with the application for grant of interim relief. The appeal was preferred under Rule 77 of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963, which was numbered as Appeal No.102 of 2019. Since no decision was taken on the said appeal, the petitioner filed another writ petition being Writ C No.14688 of 1999 (Ramesh Chand Vaishy Vs. State of U.P. and others). The said writ petition was finally disposed of by coordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgement and order dated 26.4.2019 granting liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application for interim protection along-with certified copy of the order before the appellate authority. The appellate authority was directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in the light of the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Mool Chand Yadav and another Vs. Raja Buland Sugar Company Limited, Rampur and others, 1982 (3) SCC 484.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid order passed by this Court was immediately submitted by the petitioner before the Commissioner, Vindhyanchal Mandal, Mirzapur. It is further stated that inspite of the fact that statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending consideration before the appellate authority and although an application for interim injunction was also filed by the petitioner along-with the said appeal and although directions were already given by a Division Bench of this Court on 26.4.2019 directing the appellate authority to consider the same and pass appropriate orders till date no orders whatsoever has been passed on the said application filed by the petitioner and on the other hand a notice was issued by the Tehsildar, Tehsil- Rabertsganj,District Sonbhadra/respondent no.6 on 4.8.2019 directing the petitioner to present in his office on 14.8.2019 along-with the relevant documents. It is contended that reply was duly submitted by the petitioner in response to the notice dated 4.8.2019 but till date no orders was passed on the same and without considering the orders passed by this Court dated 26.4.2019 in the writ petition filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.5 attached the property of the petitioner on 6.8.2019 in order to recover the royalty money to the extent of Rs.9,76,00000/- and further 21.8.2019 was fixed as a date for auction of the attached property. Challenging the aforesaid action on part of the respondents the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending hence with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
From perusal of the records, it is clear that against the order passed by the respondent no.3/District Magistrate, Sonbhadra dated 19.1.2019 a statutory appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the Commissioner, Vindhyanchal Mandal, Mirzapur/respondent no.2. Along-with the said appeal an application for grant of interim injunction was also filed. In the writ petition filed by the petitioner being Writ C No.14688 of 2019 a decision has already been given by a Division Bench of this Court on 26.4.2019 directing the appellate authority to consider and pass appropriate orders on the stay application filed by the petitioner expeditiously. On the one hand appellate authority is not passing any order on the said application submitted by the petitioner and on the other hand proceedings were initiated for not only attaching the property of the petitioner but orders were also passed to auction the same on 21.8.2019.
In our opinion the aforesaid act on the part of the respondents are highly arbitrarily and illegal. In the facts and circumstances, we think it proper to issue a mandamus directing the Commissioner, Vindhyanchal Mandal, Mirzapur/respondent no.2 to pass appropriate orders on the stay application submitted by the petitioner for grant of interim relief within a period of one months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.
In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of finally with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation along- with certified copy of this order before the appellate authority within a period of ten days from today. The appellate authority shall dispose of the application of the petitioner for interim relief positively within a period of one month from the date of filing of such application.
It is further provided that for a period of two months or till the disposal of the stay application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. Auction, if any, has been held by the respondents, the same could not be given the effect till the time decision is taken by the appellate authority on the stay application filed by the petitioner as indicated above.
Learned counsel for the petitioner assures the Court that petitioner shall not take unnecessarily adjournment before the appellate authority.
It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the case and thus it is for authority concerned to take a decision independently in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019 Pramod Tripathi