M/S R P Singh Stone Works Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 5362 of 2022

¶2

M/s. R.P. Singh Stone Works, through

¶3

its proprietor Rajeshwar Pd. Singh ..... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

1. The State of Jharkhand.

¶6

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj, P.O. and P.S. Sahebganj, District- Sahebganj

¶7

3. The District Mining Officer, Sahebganj, P.O. and P.S. Sahebganj, District- Sahebganj ..... Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLEMR.JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha, Adv. For the Respondents : None

¶10

¶11

9/18.03.2024 Heard Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha. None appears on behalf of the State.

¶12

2. In this Writ Application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a direction upon the respondents to extend the period of mining lease granted to the petitioner in terms of the order of sanctioning as contained in Memo No.2835 dated 21.08.2015 issued by the District Mining Officer, Sahebganj (respondent no.3) over an area of 7.60 acres of land, situated under MouzaBaskole, District Sahebganj effective from 07.09.2012 to 06.09.2022 by giving benefit of the period during which mining activities could not be carried out on account of delayed issuance of the Environmental Clearance Certificate.

¶13

3 . Briefly states the facts reveal that initially in respect to Plot No.448 (Part), 450 to 453 measuring an area of 7.60 acres of land situated under Mouza-Banskol within the District Sahebganj, a mining lease for stone was granted to the petitioner in the year 2002 for a period of 10 years which was effective from 07.09.2002. The

¶14

¶15

petitioner consequent to the execution of the lease deed had started mining activities and prior to expiry of the lease deed had made an application within time on 27.04.2012. According to the petitioner all the necessary documents were submitted save and except the consent letter of Ministry of Environment and Forest and the Royalty Clearance Certificate. However, since there was a deemed rejection of the said application, the petitioner had preferred a revision application being Revision Case No.257 of 2012 and it was disposed of on 23.07.2015 by setting aside the deemed rejection and directing the Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj to examine the issue and pass a necessary order on merit. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj after perusing the documents submitted by the petitioner and in terms of the order dated 23.07.2015 passed in Revision Case No.257/12 had ordered for renewal of the lease which was valid upto 06.09.2022.

¶16

4 . Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon an order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.5758 of 2023 while submitting that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause in running his stone mines on account of delay on the part of concerned authority in issuing Environmental Clearance Certificate. It has been submitted that the petitioner could not operate his mines from 06.09.2012 to 07.09.2015.

¶17

5 . The grievance of the petitioner is with respect to non-relaxation of the period from 06.09.2012 to 07.09.2015 on account of non-issuance of the Environmental Clearance Certificate by the concerned authority and this fact has not been considered by the

¶18

¶19

concerned respondent who has to decide the issue at the first instance.

¶20

6. Accordingly, this writ application stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation before the respondent no.2 within a period of two weeks along with a copy of this order as well as the copy of writ petition who shall consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order within a period of two weeks from the date of submission of such representation after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶21

7. This writ application accordingly in view of the above stands disposed of.

¶22

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶23

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶24

Fahim/Amardeep/

¶25

M/S R P Singh Stone Works v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S R P Singh Stone Works v. the State of Jharkhand

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

M/S Ssp Enterprises Represented Thro One of Its Partners Pradeep Kumar Pasari Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro the Secretary Department of Mines and Geology

M/S Ssp Enterprises Represented Thro One of Its Partners Pradeep Kumar Pasari Vs the State of Jahrkhand Thro the Secretary Department of Mines and Geology

M/S MD Zafar Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro Its Pr Secretary Health Education and Family Welfare Department

M/S N K Enterprises Thro Its Proprietor Lal Chandra Kishore Nath Shahdeo Vs the State of Jharkhand

Govind Pramanik Vs Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited Represented through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director and Ors.

Shrawan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand