Allowed

Md. Ajim Khan v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC6 Dec 2023WPA/16343/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an order rejecting a petitioner's representation regarding mining documents. It held the rejection was erroneous as all documents were actually submitted, and directed reconsideration within two months.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order passed by the Assistant Secretary on 20th May 2022 was set aside. The writ petition was disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to reconsider the representation submitted by the pe

Md. Ajim Khan Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Mining and Natural Resources | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

December 6, 2023 ARDR (488)

¶2

WPA 16343 of 2022

¶3

Md. Ajim Khan

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Adv. Pallav Chatterjee, Adv. Monajit Chakraborti,

¶7

…for the petitioner.

¶8

Adv. Chandi Charan De, Adv. Anirban Sarkar,

¶9

…for the State.

¶10

On prayer of the petitioner, the name of 3^rd respondent be expunged from the cause title of the writ petition.

¶11

The cause title of the writ petition be amended accordingly.

¶12

The order passed by the Assistant Secretary, Department of Industries, Commerce and Enterprises, being the 2^nd respondent herein, on 20^th May, 2022 is assailed in the writ petition.

¶13

Pursuant to an earlier order of this Court dated 14^th March, 2022 in WPA 1324 of 2022 directing the authority to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 3^rd July, 2021 upon taking into consideration Rule 61 of the West Bengal Minor Minerals Rules, 2016 and Rule 34 of the West Bengal Sand (Mining, Transport, Storage and Sale) Rules, 2021 within a stipulated time frame, the concerned authority called for several documents from the petitioner which were submitted by the petitioner

¶14

¶15

before the authority on 13^th May, 2022. By the order impugned, the 2^nd respondent has turned down the representation submitted by the petitioner primarily on the ground that the petitioner submitted only three of the documents called for and failed to submit the remaining three documents.

¶16

It appears from the receipt issued by the department upon submission of the documents by the petitioner on 13^th May, 2022 that all documents called for by the authority were submitted by the petitioner on the said date. The concerned authority may have overlooked the said fact in dealing with the representation. Since the order impugned wrongly records that the documents required to be produced by the petitioner were not submitted within the stipulated period, the order is required to be set aside and the matter sent for reconsideration by the authority in accordance with law.

¶17

In view of the above, the order passed by the 2^nd respondent on 20^th May, 2022 is set aside.

¶18

The writ petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to reconsider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 3^rd July, 2021 upon affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and in the light of the observation made by this Court in the order dated 14^th March, 2022 in WPA 1324 of 2022 within two months

¶19

¶20

from the date of communication of this order, in accordance with law.

¶21

The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereof.

¶22

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶23

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶24

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to be admitted.

¶25

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶26

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

Md. Ajim Khan v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Ajim Khan v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

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

Md. Abdur Rajjak Vs Union of India & Ors.

MD Jairul Islam Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Swapan Kr. Datta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sk Nasim Alam Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Lakshman Chandra Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Aswini Kr. Giri Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.