Prima facie, it appears that the mining lease granted in favour of the sixth respondent for the period between 20 December 2013 to 19 December 2016 was executed on 20 December 2013 and is therefore evidently after 31 May 2012 when a declaration was issued by the State Government by which the provisions of Chapter IV of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 were applied so as to declare that mining leases would be entered into by following the e-tendering process. The grant would, prima facie, be contrary to the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Nar Narain Mishra vs. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (2) ADJ 166 (DB) and two subsequent decisions in (i) Sukhan Singh vs. State of U.P. and others, 2014 (11) ADJ 89 (DB); and (ii) Udaypal Singh vs. State of U.P. and others, 2015 (10) ADJ 60 (DB).
We grant time to the Standing counsel as also to the learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent to file their replies on this petition.
In the meantime, having due regard to the fact that prima facie the execution of the lease appears to be in breach of the law as laid down by this Court, there shall be an ad interim order restraining the sixth respondent from acting upon the lease and from carrying out any mining or excavation work.
Connect this Petition with Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 6968 of 2016 (Sudhir Kumar Vs. State of U.P. And 4 Others).
List this petition on the date fixed.
Order Date :- 3.3.2016 Arun K. Singh (Yashwant Varma, J.) (Dr D Y Chandrachud, CJ)