The Court disposed of three writ petitions alleging enforcement of a mining demand while an internal administrative appeal was pending. The Court directed that recovery be stayed until the Commissioner pronounces the reserved order.
Recovery of the impugned demand should not be enforced till the appeal order is pronounced by the Commissioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Serial No. 14 (E. Court)
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 404 of 2022
Petitioner :- Mahendra Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and others
Along with
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 408 of 2022
Petitioner :- Imran Ali Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Along with Case :- WRIT - C No. - 413 of 2022
Petitioner :- Vanshraj Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mr. Ashish Kumar Srivastava, Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- Mr. Alok Kumar Singh, Standing Counsel
Hon'ble Rajesh Bindal,Chief Justice Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
This order will dispose of three petitions as noticed above.
The only grievance raised by learned counsel for the petitioners is that against the order dated October 12, 2021 passed by the District Magistrate under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, the petitioners had filed appeal before the Commissioner, Vindhayanchal Division, Mirzapur under Rule-77 of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules 1963. In the aforesaid appeal, arguments have already been heard and order was reserved on November 16, 2021, however still the demand impugned in the appeal is being enforced by the department.
Learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute the fact that arguments in appeal preferred by the petitioners have been heard and the order was reserved on November 16, 2021. He submitted that the order is likely to be pronounced very soon.
After hearing learned counsel or the parties, in our view the petitions can be disposed of with a direction that till such time, the order is pronounced by the
-2-
Commissioner, Vindhayanchal Division, Mirzapur in the appeals filed by the petitioners, recovery of the demand impugned in the appeals should not be enforced.
The petitions are, accordingly, disposed of.
Date :- 24.1.2022 Shiraz/SA
(Piyush Agrawal, J.) (Rajesh Bindal, C.J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the enforcement of a disputed mining demand should be stayed while an appeal before the Commissioner is pending?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mahendra Kumar
Imran Ali
Vanshraj Singh
State of U.P.
Rajesh Bindal
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
