Disposed

Smt Laxmi Tudu And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC3 Jan 2023WPC/1473/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a mining lease deed granted to a private company, the court addressed the mandatory requirement of Gram Sabha consent. Upon doubts regarding the validity of the existing consent, the court disposed of the petition by directing the Deputy Commissioner and the lessee to conduct a fresh Gram Sabha consultation. Future validity depends on such consent. No substantive rul

What did the court decide?

Disposed of the writ petition directing the Deputy Commissioner and the private respondent to take steps for a fresh Gram Sabha.

Smt Laxmi Tudu And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors. — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No.1473 of 2017

¶3

....

¶4

Smt. Laxmi Tudu

¶5

Biru Bodra .… Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner Seraikella Kharswan P.O, P.S. Seraikella District Seraikella Kharswan

¶9

The Circle Officer, Rajnagar Circle, P.O. P.S. Rajnagar District Seraikella Kharswan

¶10

The District Mining Officer Seraikella Kharswan, P.O. P.S. Seraikella, District Seraikella Kharswan

¶11

The Assistant Mining Officer, District Mining Office Seraikella Kharswan P.O. P.S. Seraikella, District Seraikella Kharswan

¶12

The Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project building Dhurwa, Ranchi

¶13

The Divisional Forest Officer Seraikella Kharswan, P.O. P.S. Seraikella, District- Seraikella Kharswan

¶14

The Regional Officer, Pollution Control Board, Adityapur, P.O. P.S. Adityapur District- Seraikella Kharswan

¶15

The Member Secretary, The Jharkhand State Pollution Board, Engineers’ Hostel Dhurwa, Ranchi

¶16

The District Registrar, Seraikella Kharswan, P.O. P.S. Seraikella District Seraikella Kharswan

¶17

M/s Bimaldeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. through its Director, Sri Ajay Kumar Murarka .... Respondents

¶18

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶19

For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K.Mahato, Adv. For the Res. Nos. 1 to 7 & 10 : Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr. S.C.-II For the Res. No.11 : Mr. Nitin Kumar Pasari,Adv.

¶20

10/03.01.2023 The present writ petition has been filed for cancellation of lease Deed granted on 21.03.2016 and registered on 06.06.2016 in favour of private respondent No.11 by the State-respondent for 10 years for stone mines over the area of 38.91 acres in the plot No.408 and 409 under Khata No.192 of the village Bandua P.S. Rajnagar, District-Seraikella Kharswan.

¶21

The point has been taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is mandatory requirement of consent from the Gram Sabha. Without consent of the Gram Sabha no mining activity can be carried out. It has been further submitted that documentation showing the consent of Gram Sabha are wrong and illegal. The veracity of that has been challenged.

¶22

It further appears that the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella Kharswan has made an enquiry and found that the consent of Gram Sabha is not as per the Law. On above basis submission has been made that the lease deed should be cancelled.

¶23

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has submitted that the Deputy Commissioner has found that the consent of the Gram Sabha is not proper. Accordingly, the fresh Gram Sabha report has been asked from the private respondent.

¶24

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the private respondent that the mining activity has not been started till today rather it will be done as per the consent of the Gram Sabha.

¶25

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of record, it appears that the consent of Gram Sabha is in dispute. The consent of Gram Sabha is mandatory for grant of lease or doing the mining. Consent is sine qua non. Admittedly in the present case, consent of the Gram Sabha has been doubted.

¶26

In that view of the matter, the present writ petition stands disposed of directing the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella Kharswan and the private respondent for taking steps for fresh Gram Sabha. The further process will depend as consented by the Gram Sabha.

¶27

With above observation and direction the present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶28

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶29

Shahid/

Smt Laxmi Tudu And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Laxmi Tudu And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dena Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hemwanti Kunwar Alias Hemni Devi Alias Hemwati Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Shiv Charan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Baruni Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Deptt of Food and Civil Supplies

Akshay Jain Vs Mines And Geological Survey

Mahesh Kumar Verma Alias Mahesh Kr Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand