Disposed

Pawan Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2020WRIC/4183/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging mining lease cancellation due to non-payment of royalty. Court allowed mining operations upon deposit of Rs. 30 lakhs within a stipulated timeframe, with balance due in instalments including interest.

What did the court decide?

Permission to commence mining on deposit of Rs. 30 lakhs within 15 days; balance in three monthly instalments plus dues and interest.

Pawan Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Mining and Natural Resources | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4183 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

¶7

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records and quashing the impugned orders dated 23.1.2020 (passed in Case No.00024 of 2019) and 27.12.2018 as well as the impugned demand notice dated 7.1.2019 passed by the respondent nos.2 and 3 respectively;

¶8

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to operate the mining lease granted to him of Gata No.9GH/5 admeasuring area 5 hectare at Village Khaira, Tehsil Sadar, District Mirzapur without any hindrance;

¶9

(c) to issue such other and further appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;

¶10

(d) to award the cost of petition in favour of the petitioner."

¶11

Following orders were passed by us in this case on 17.2.2020 and 19.2.2020 :-

¶12

On 17.2.2020 :-

¶13

"The contention is that the petitioner's mining lease has been cancelled on the ground of his having failed to deposit the amount of royalty from 01.01.2019. Further contention is that the petitioner is ready to deposit the entire amount which he is required to pay towards royalty including for the period during which he has not carried out any mining, in case his lease is restored.

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is allowed 24 hours time to seek instructions in the matter.

¶15

Put up this case in the additional cause list on 19.2.2020. "

¶16

On 19.2.2020 :-

¶17

"Learned Standing Counsel has submitted on the basis of the instructions received by him from the respondent no.3, which are taken on record, that

¶18

total amount which the petitioner is required to deposit towards the royalty is Rs.99,90,000/- as on 1.1.2020.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed 24 hours time to seek instructions from his client.

¶20

Put up tomorrow i.e. on 20.2.2020. "

¶21

When this matter was taken up today, learned Standing Counsel submitted on the basis of the instructions received by him that in case the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the entire amount demanded from him, he shall be granted permission to commence the mining operations.

¶22

In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to deposit the amount demanded from him in four instalments.

¶23

Learned Standing Counsel in reply to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that in case the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.30 lakhs towards the first instalment within a period of 15 days from today, he has no objection to the petitioner being allowed to deposit the balance amount in instalments.

¶24

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, we dispose of the writ petition with the following directions :-

¶25

In case the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.30 lakhs before respondent no.3 on or before 16th March, 2020, respondent no.3 shall allow the petitioner to start the mining operations on the area which has been allotted to him.

¶26

The petitioner shall deposit the balance amount in three monthly equal instalments.

¶27

It is made clear that along with the aforesaid amount, the petitioner shall also deposit the current instalment as and when the same falls due.

¶28

The last instalment shall include the entire upto date accrued interest on the amount demanded from the petitioner for the period 1.1.2019 to 17.2.2020.

¶29

In case of default of any of the aforesaid conditions on the part of the petitioner, this writ petition shall stand dismissed and the petitioner shall not be entitled to any benefit of this order.

¶30

Order Date :- 20.2.2020 Shalini

Pawan Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Sri Avantika Contractors (I) Limited Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Praveen and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Sanehi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Guddi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Monu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Vikram Construction Co. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others