Learned Counsel for the review petitioner has conceded that the petitioner has been refunded the advance royalty amount of Rs.6,73,46,850/- (Rupees Six Crores Seventy Three Lakhs Forty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Forty) after adjustment of mining of MM-11, but the petitioner has not been paid interest on the due amount. In view of this, learned Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for interest before Writ Court on the ground that on receipt of Environmental Clearance, Form-MM-10/permit was granted for the period 14.06.2017 to 30.12.2017. However, on account of monsoon season, the mining activity of the petitioner was stopped from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2017 and thereafter, the mining of the cancellation was passed by the District Magistrate vide order dated 07.10.2017. Since no fault of the petitioner, the mining lease granted to the petitioner was cancelled and the interest on refunded amount of advance royalty was also not paid. In support of her submission that the petitioner is entitled for interest, she has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Dharmendra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and others [(2021) 1 SCC 93], wherein it has been held that the appellants in this case were entitled to refund of security deposit and advance royalty paid, with 9% interest.
