M/S Aiu Mines and Minerals vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others

The controversy involved in the present writ petition is that the respondent no. 2 vide public notice dated 22.12.2023 had invited bids for mining lease for grit / boulder (Dolo-Stone) in District-Sonbhadra. The petitioner had applied for a mining lease in respect of land comprised in Gata No. 5593Ka (Khand-9) at Village-Billi Karkundi, Tehsil-Obra, District-Sonbhadra having an area of 4.000 hectare. The bid of the petitioner being highest was accepted and a letter of intent was issued on 15.02.2024.

¶13

The petitioner in pursuance to the letter of intent dated 15.02.2024 had deposited the amount of security as well as amount of first installment, total amounting to Rs. 3,81,34,000/- on 16.02.2024. The petitioner also deposited the amount for cluster report and demarcation fees, which is essential for getting Environmental Clearance Certificate from the competent authority. Subsequently, a demarcation report dated 26.02.2024 was also provided to the petitioner and on 02.03.2024, the cluster report was issued to the petitioner. The Environmental Clearance Certificate could not be provided to the petitioner on account of non availability of District Survey Report (DSR).

¶14

The petitioner made several requests to the office of respondent no. 2 to provide the District Survey Report, but all such requests went in vain. It is further submitted that, in the meanwhile, the office of respondent no. 2 vide press note dated 06.06.2025 had issued updation/modification of the draft of

¶15

WRIC No. 40225 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

District Survey Report on the basis of which the area of the mining site allotted to the petitioner was reduced from 4.000 hectare to 3.310 hectare. The area so notified was not in accordance to the letter of intent dated 15.02.2024 issued to the petitioner in respect of the mining lease and had been reduced.

¶18

Under the circumstances, the petitioner had made representation before the respondent no. 2 for refund of amount of Rs. 3,81,34,000/- along with 9% interest from the date of deposit of the same i.e. 16.02.2024 but no action was taken on the same by the respondents.

¶19

The petitioner has filed present writ petition seeking a direction for the respondent no. 2 to return the amount of Rs. 3,81,34,000/- along with 9% interest from the date of deposit of the same i.e. 16.02.2024. The petitioner in the present writ petition has relied upon the judgment and order dated 10.04.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 19619-19620 of 2017 (M/s Planet Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Haryana & others) in support of his case.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order ventilating all his grievances before the respondent no.2-District Magistrte/Collector, District-Sonbhadra, within a period of one month from today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter from the date he receives representation of the petitioner.

¶22

November 18, 2025 Arif

¶23

(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S Aiu Mines and Minerals v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aiu Mines and Minerals v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jay Prakash Yadav vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arun Kumar vs State of Up and 4 Others

Barat Kumar Lakhmani vs U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission Lucknow and Another

Dhirendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vinod Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajeshwar Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others