Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:26214
Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 631 of 2023
Petitioner :- Rajesh Sharma Thru. Its Proprietor Rajesh Sharma
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin.
Secy. Geology And Mining Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Mishra,Shishir Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Shri Mukesh Prasad, learned Senior Advocate, assisted
by Shri Amit Upadhyay and Shri Shishir Yadav, Advocates on
behalf of the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel
representing the State-respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner has filed an
application for amendment of the writ petition by which he
seeks to amend the prayer and assail the order dated 29.10.2020
passed by District Magistrate, Kaushambi.
3. There is no objection by the Standing counsel and
accordingly the application for amendment is allowed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to make
necessary incorporation in the memo of the petition during
course of day.
5. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has
challenged the order dated 17.09.2021 passed by the State
Government in revision under section 78 of U.P. Minor
Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as
‘the Rules, 1963) whereby the State Government has rejected
the revision and upheld of the order of the District Magistrate
dated 29.10.2020 whereby the mining lease of the petitioner has
been cancelled and he was directed to pay the amount of first
installment of royalty for the second year.
6. The brief facts of the case are that as per the New
Government Policy-2017, a Government Order for settlement
of lease under Chapter IV by e-tender/e-auction dated
14.08.2017 was issued. The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals
(Concession)(43 Amendment) Rules, 2017 were framed
whereby the mining lease was to be granted as per the
procedure prescribed under the statutory Rules. Accordingly, an
advertisement was issued on 05.09.2017 by the District
Magistrate, Kaushambi for settlement of mining lease of sand
and mourram under the amended Rules, 2017 in district-
Kaushambi for several mining blocks by e-tendering.
7. The petitioner had also participated in the said process and
had submitted an application for mining lease for mining in
Village-Yamunapura, Tehsil-Manjhanpur, District-Kaushambi
from the Yamuna river, measuring 24.28 hectares for a quantity
of 4,80,000 cubic mtrs per year. The bid of the petitioner being
the highest was accepted by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi
and thereafter by means of the letter dated 13.11.2017
subsequent to which a letter of intent dated 04.12.2017 was
issued and the petitioner fulfilled all the formalities including
the deposit of security money as well as the first installment of
the annual lease amount. Accordingly, a lease deed was
executed and registered in favour of the petitioner on
17.02.2018 for a period of five years i.e. from 17.02.2018 to
16.02.2023.
8. The petitioner after entering into the lease deed entered into
the mining area and continued mining till 15.02.2019. During
this period he found that the entire lease area of the petitioner
was submersed into the river and no mining is possible except
on small area. The petitioner moved a representation to the
District Magistrate, Kaushambi on 31.12.2018 stating that no
mining is possible in the area allowed to the petitioner and also
that there is prohibition of mining in case the water level rises
and the land get submersed and accordingly in the aforesaid
compelling circumstances requested the District Magistrate,
Kaushambi for cancellation/surrender of the mining lease.
Despite the letter of the petitioner dated 31.12.2018, the Mines
Officer, Kaushambi issued a demand notice dated 19.02.2019
demanding the installment of the lease amount along with
interest. The petitioner under a belief that an appropriate order
would be passed on his application dated 31.12.2018 did not
deposit the amount demanded by the notice dated 19.02.2019
and consequently by means of the order dated 25.03.2019 the
mining lease of the petitioner was cancelled and recovery
proceedings were initiated for recovery of the outstanding
amount of royalty.
9. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order of cancellation of
the mining lease dated 25.03.2019 as well as recovery
proceedings approached this Court by filing a writ petition
being Writ-C No.16183 of 2019. One of the grounds raised by
the petitioner for assailing the order of cancellation of the
mining lease was that as per the show cause notice issued to the
petitioner it was stated that the entire security amount deposited
by the petitioner was liable to be adjusted towards a
dues/liability fixed upon the petitioner. This Court was of the
considered view that the said show cause notice was illegal,
arbitrary and was not supported by the statutory provisions
whereby the security amount could have been forfeited and
consequently allowed the writ petition by means of the
judgment and order dated 19.02.2020 whereby quashing the
order dated 25.03.2019 passed by the Additional District
Magistrate (F&R), Kaushambi as well as recovery certificate
dated 05.04.2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi
and allowed the writ petition. It further granted liberty to the
respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner in
accordance with law.
10. It is in compliance of the judgment of this Court dated
19.02.220 that the respondents decided to initiate fresh
proceedings against the petitioner and issued a show cause
notice dated 30.05.2020. In the said show cause notice the
operative portion of the judgment of this Court dated
19.02.2020 was mentioned and subsequently they asked the
petitioner to respond to letter dated 25.03.2019 within a period
of 20 days. The petitioner responded to the notice dated
30.05.2020 and denied the allegations levelled therein and
requested that an inspection may be conducted to verify as to
whether minor minerals were available for mining and the lease
deed be suitably amended and the excess royalty paid by the
petitioner be refunded. By means of the impugned order dated
29.10.2020 the District Magistrate has cancelled the mining
lease and forfeited the security amount of the petitioner and has
sought recovery of an amount of Rs.3,57,72,000/-. Against the
impugned order dated 29.10.2020 the petitioner has preferred a
revision before the State Government which has also been
rejected by means of the order dated 17.09.2021. In the present
writ petition the petitioner has impugned the order of
cancellation passed by the District Magistrate, Kaushambi as
well as revisional order passed by the State Government.
11. The main plank of the argument of the petitioner is that on
the first occasion when he has approached this Court
challenging the order of cancellation this Court had considered
the arguments raised by the petitioner with regard to the
infirmity in the previous order of cancellation dated 25.03.2019
whereby the security amount deposited by the petitioner was
liable to be adjusted towards dues/liability fixed upon the
petitioner after cancellation of the lease deed. This Court was
also of the view that the said order was without any statutory
basis and recovery if any against the petitioner could have been
made as arrears of land revenue; rather than forfeiting the
security amount deposited by him and consequently had set
aside the order dated 25.03.2019 as well as consequential
recovery proceedings. It has been submitted that once the order
dated 25.03.2019 has been found to be illegal and arbitrary and
having been quashed by this Court then the respondents could
not have asked to the petitioner to respond to the same order
once again in the show cause notice dated 30.05.2020.
Accordingly, on this acount it is stated that the respondents
have overlooked the previous judgement of this Court dated
19.02.2020 and in fact have acted contrary to the directions of
this Court and on this ground alone the proceedings of the writ
petition deserves to be set aside.
12. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has opposed
the writ petition and has submitted that U.P. Minor and
Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 have been amended w.e.f.
14.08.2019 and now there is a provision for cancellation after
adjusting the security money deposit made by the lease holder,
but he does not dispute the fact that on the previous occasion
this Court had quashed the order dated 25.03.2019 passed by
the Additional District Magistrate (F&R), Kaushambi and
recovery certificate dated 05.04.2019.
13. Considering the rival submissions, only question urged by
the petitioner is that the previous proceedings were held to be
illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the statutory provisions and the
cancellation order dated 25.03.2019 was set aside only on the
ground that the respondents had proceeded contrary to the
provisions of U.P. Minor Minerals (Concessions) Rules, 1963
and specially clause 19(3) of the Government Order dated
14.08.2017 which does not permit the forfeiture of the security
amount deposited by the lessee/petitioner and only provided the
realization of the said amount as arrears of land revenue along
with the interest prescribed. In the fresh show cause notice
dated 30.05.2020 the petitioner has again been asked to respond
to the order dated 25.03.2019. This Court was of the considered
opinion that once the order 25.03.2019 has been held to be
illegal and arbitrary and has been quashed by this Court it was
not within the competence of the respondents to have asked to
the petitioner to respond to the said order once again. It is clear
that the respondents have proceeded clearly in violation of the
previous order of this Court dated 19.02.2020 passed in Writ-C
No.16183 of 2029 in a most illegal and arbitrary manner.
14. Accordingly, without delving into the merit of the
controversy, the proceedings impugned in this petition are also
quashed. The orders dated 17.9.2021, 4.10.2021, 19.2.2022 and
29.10.2020, as contained in Annexure No.s 1, 2, 3 and 17 to the
writ petition, are quashed.
15. The writ petition is allowed.
(Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 29.3.2024
RKM.
Digitally signed by :-
RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench