The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash notices directing deposit of sums under Jharkhand mining rules. The single-judge bench held that the petitioners have an efficacious statutory remedy of appeal, rendering the writ petition not maintainable at that stage.
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 JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2208 of 2020
..... … Petitioners
…. …. Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
-----For the Petitioners : Mr. Kalyan Roy, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, A.C. to A.G.
Order No. 04 Dated: 19.01.2021
The present writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notices/letters dated 15.04.2019 and 08.06.2020 issued by the respondent no. 4 (wrongly mentioned as respondent no. 3 in paragraph nos. 1 and 29 as well as in the prayer portion of the writ petition) directing the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 to deposit a sum of Rs. 15,03,677/- and Rs.7,70,199/respectively alleging violation of provisions of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017.
3. Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, learned A.C. to A.G., at the outset, submits that the petitioners have the efficacious/statutory remedy of preferring appeal against the impugned notices/letters issued by the respondent no. 4, under the relevant rules.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view that the petitioners have the efficacious/statutory remedy of preferring appeal against the impugned notices/letters issued by the respondent no. 4, I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition at this stage.
5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. The petitioners are however at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the impugned notices/letters dated 15.04.2019 and 08.06.2020 issued by the respondent no. 4, as available under law.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Ritesh/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing the deposit notices directing payment under the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules and Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining) Rules is maintainable when a
Subash Kumar Sahi
Gopal Chandra Dutta
State of Jharkhand
Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology, Government of Jharkhand
Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur
District Mining Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
