Disposed
Atma Ram v. State
Himachal Pradesh HCCWP/6946/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.…
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CWP No. 6946 of 2010. Decided on: 1.12.2011.
___________________________________________________________ Sh. Atma Ram … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the petitioner : Mr. B.N. Mehta & Mr. Rajeshwar Thakur, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy.A.G.
___________________________________________________________ Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral).
The petition has been filed on the following
substantive prayers vide para 18 (i) and (ii):-
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No.
2
situated in Mauza Shilla, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmour, H.P. for extraction of lime stone mineral was granted for a term of 10 years w.e.f. 17.3.1987 to 16.3.1997 in favour of the petitioner under the provisions of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. Subsequently, the lease granted in favour of the petitioner was transferred on the written request of the petitioner under the provisions of Rule 37 of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 in favour of the respondent No.4 on 6.12.1995. As such the petitioner has no right to interfere in the matter for renewal of mining lease, when it has already been transferred by him.
2.
That the respondent No.4 had submitted the mining lease renewal application on 19.3.1996, which has been rejected by the respondentState vide letter dated 24.12.2009 after affording an opportunity to the respondent No.4 for making oral or written submission on 16.11.2009 as the area under reference was a forest land and attracting the provisions of Forest Conservation Act, 1980, requiring clearance for diversion of forest land for nonforestry purpose from the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of India, for which the respondent No.4 failed to obtain such clearance.”
3
same and take a final decision in the matter in accordance with law within further four weeks, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondent No.4, if so desired.
also pending application(s), if any.
(V.K. Sharma) Judge. December 1, 2011. (cr)
Atma Ram
State of Himachal Pradesh
Respondent No. 4
V.K. Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court