Remanded

Chetram v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2019WRIC/37814/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the appellate authority's order dismissing the petitioner's appeal for non-payment of royalty. It directed reconsideration to include all relevant documents and an examination of their genuineness.

What did the court decide?

The order of the appellate authority dated 10.9.2018 is set aside with a direction to reconsider the appeal considering all documents and their genuineness.

Chetram Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2019) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Chief Justice's Court

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37814 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Chetram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Trivedi,Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶5

This petition for writ has been preferred against the correctness of the order dated 10.9.2018 passed by the appellate authority as per the provisions of Section 77 of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 1963.

¶6

The arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that under the order aforesaid, the appellate authority was required to examine the correctness of the order dated 26.12.2017 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, (F&R) Meerut. However, the appellate authority has not taken into consideration all the relevant documents which were placed before the Additional District Magistrate, (F&R) Meerut to satisfy that the entire royalty amount was paid and as such there was no default on the part of the petitioner. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the entire issue was earlier considered and decided under the order dated 02.2.2016 by arriving at a conclusion that the royalty amount has already been paid and complaint is an outcome of personal vengeance.

¶7

A counter to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating therein that the documents on which the petitioner has placed reliance to satisfy that the royalty amount has been paid are false and fabricated and as such the same are of no consequence.

¶8

On going through the order passed by the appellate authority, we do not find any discussion about the genuineness of the document concerned. As a matter of fact, no reference of such documents is at all given.

¶9

In view of it, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition by setting aside the order dated 10.9.2018 passed by the appellate authority, Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut as per the provisions of Section 77 of the Rules, 1963 with a specific direction that the appellate authority shall reconsider the appeal of the petitioner by taking into consideration all the documents available on record relating to the complaint that

¶10

was decided by the Additional District Magistrate (F&R) Meerut under the order dated 26.12.2017. The appellate authority shall also examine the genuineness of the documents presented by the petitioner or by any other party to the proceedings before the Additional District Magistrate (F&R) Meerut. A fresh order is required to be passed by the Additional District Magistrate(F&R) District-Meerut, respondent no.4 within a period of three months from today.

¶11

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 25.3.2019 SB

¶13

( Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J) ( Govind Mathur,C.J.)

Chetram v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chetram v. State of U.P. and 7 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

Mangat and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and 15 Others

Mall Hotel Limited and Another Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Rajesh Kumar Gond Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dinesh Kumar Sahani Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Others