Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20003 of 2018 Petitioner :- Tehsildar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Malhotra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Mr. Ashish Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for respondents.
The principal prayer made in the writ petition, reads thus:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 3 to 5 to initiate action against the respondent no.6, its men and agent, i.e. respondent no.7 for carrying out the mining outside their leased area on the agricultural land holding of the petitioner."
Though, such a prayer is made, counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's grievance is against the private respondent (leaseholder), who has been using his land as access to the mining area and that the petitioner would be satisfied if he is paid compensation, as provided for under clause (f) of Rule 41 of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. Counsel for the official respondents has no objection for passing such an order in the light of the provisions of the said rule. In the circumstances, we are satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice:
Respondent no. 5 shall examine the petitioner's grievance that an access is created by the private respondent through his land to approach mining area within a period of two weeks from today and, if the allegation is found to be correct, he shall report to respondent no.2 - Director, Geology and Mines, to determine a fair compensation to be paid to him, with direction to the leaseholder to pay the said amount within time frame. If such a report is sent, respondent no.2 - Director shall decide the petitioner's claim within a period of four weeks therefrom and if his claim is allowed, shall also ensure that compensation is paid within four weeks therefrom, failing which he may proceed to cancel the mining lease. It is needless to mention that while deciding the petitioner's claim, respondent no.2 - Director shall grant an opportunity of being heard to respondent no.7.
Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 AHA (Dilip B Bhosale, CJ) (Suneet Kumar, J)