Disposed

Sameer Tiwari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC14 May 2019WRIC/16500/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged unauthorized use of his land for mineral transportation. Court directed him to approach the District Magistrate under Rule 41(f) of UP Minor Minerals Rules, 1963, directing the administrative authority to decide within three months. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner given liberty to apply to District Magistrate; DM directed to pass order within three months.

Sameer Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16500 of 2019 Petitioner :- Sameer Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶3

The petitioner claims that he is a poor farmer. He has instituted this writ petition for the following reliefs:

¶4

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 &3 to restrain the respondent no.4 for using the land of the petitioner bearing plot no.58 & 618-Kha situated at Village Gadauli, tehsil Rajapur, District Chitrakoot for transportation of minerals (Sand and Morrum).

¶5

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no 2 & 3 to ensure for payment of the compensation to the petitioner by the respondent no.4 for using the land of the petitioner as transportation of minerals (Sand and Morrum) as provided under the Minerals Concession Rules, 1960."

¶6

The grievance of the petitioner is that the private respondent is using his agricultural field for transportation of illegal mining materials by their heavy vehicles without his consent. He has made complaints to the authorities but all in vain.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K.Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel.

¶8

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties the matter is taken on the Board for final disposal in terms of the Rules of the Court.

¶9

Having due regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ends of justice require that liberty be given to the petitioner to raise his grievance by way of a representation to the District Magistrate in terms of Rule 41 (f) of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. In the event any such application is made within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, we direct the District Magistrate to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order.

¶10

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 14.5.2019 MAA/-

Sameer Tiwari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer Tiwari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Asha Ram Contractors Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Karamveer Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Farooq Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharamvir Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Surendra Gupta Vs Smt. Anita Gupta

Deependra Singh Chauhan @ Deepu Chauhan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others