Birendra Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

2025:JHHC:23689-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 6832 of 2024

¶4

---------------

¶5

Niranjan Kumar Choudhary, aged about 63 years, son of Shri Jitendra Nath Choudhary, Resident of –Village Daldali, P.O. & P.S. Rajganj, DistrictDhanbad …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. The State of Jharkhand.

¶8

2. Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi.

¶9

3. District Mining Officer, Dhanbad, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, DistrictDhanbad. .... Respondents

¶10

With

¶11

Birendra Prasad, aged about 46 years, son of Damru Mahto, resident of Dhangi, P.O. Rowan Kakomath, P.S. Katras, District- Dhanbad.

¶12

…. Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

1. The State of Jharkhand.

¶15

2. Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi.

¶16

3. District Mining Officer, Dhanbad, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, DistrictDhanbad. . ... Respondents

¶17

With W.P.(C) No. 2780 of 2025

¶18

---------------

¶19

Md. Zakir Quraishi, aged 46 years, Son of Badlu Qureshi, resident of Village-Charak Pathar, Post- Kalyanpur, P.S. Barwa adda, DistrictDhanbad. …. Petitioner

¶20

Versus

¶21

1. The State of Jharkhand.

¶22

2025:JHHC:23689-DB

¶23

2. Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi.

¶24

3. District Mining Officer, Dhanbad, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, DistrictDhanbad. .... Respondents

¶25

With W.P.(C) No. 3832 of 2025

¶26

---------------

¶27

Jagdamba Prasad, aged about 36 years, son of Purshottam Kushwaha, resident of 24 Rajbari Road, Gandhi Chowk, P.O. Katras Bazar, P.S. Katrasgarh, District-Dhanbad. …. Petitioner

¶28

Versus

¶29

1. The State of Jharkhand.

¶30

2. Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi.

¶31

3. District Mining Officer, Dhanbad, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, DistrictDhanbad. .... Respondents

¶32

----------

¶33

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI

¶34

------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Sachin Kumar A.A.G.-II : Mr. Shrey Mishra, AC to A.G. : Mr. Srikant, Advocate : Mr. Rishi Ranjan Vats, Advocate

¶35

Order No.04/Dated 14^th August, 2025

¶36

1. The writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, since, common issues have been involved in all the writ petitions, for the sake of convenience, relief(s) prayed in W.P.(C) No. 6832 of 2024 is quoted hereunder :-

¶37

(i) In the instant writ application the petitioner prays for grant of appropriate writ/order/direction from this Hon’ble Court for quashing the letter No. 1297, dated 28.08.2024

¶38

2

¶39

2025:JHHC:23689-DB

¶40

(Annexure-7) issued by District Mining Officer, Dhanbad (Respondent No.3) whereby and whereunder, District Mining Officer has been pleased to impose penalty of Rs.4,33,593/and interest from 23.02.2019 to 31.05.2024 amounting to Rs. 5,48,822/- being total amount of Rs. 9.82.415/- for the brick year 2018-19 in violation of Rule 4, 30, 31, 32 and 34(A)(1), 34(I) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rule and the petitioner manufactured about 5,30,000 bricks without obtaining Environment Clearance and Consent to Operate from Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board being illegal, arbitrary and biased against the petitioner.

¶41

(ii) Further for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction from this Hon’ble Court for a declaration that Rule 65 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules 2004 is ultra vires to Section 15(2) of the Mines & Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 as the Central Government has not delegated the power to the State Government to frame any rule providing for a forum of appeal.

¶42

(iii) For grant of any other relief(s) for which the petitioner may be found entitled with.

¶43

2. Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, learned counsel for the writ petitioners has argued in the case at length, however, Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned A.A.G-II has submitted that the writ petitioners even though have been afforded an opportunity to represent their case before the authority as per the notice dated 31.05.2023, but they have chosen not to appear, as such, it is not a case where the plea of principle of natural justice is said to be taken as defense. Hence, the writ petitions may not be entertained in view of the fact that there are two alternate remedy by way of appeal as well as revision is available.

¶44

3

¶45

2025:JHHC:23689-DB

¶46

3. Upon this, Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners seek leave of this Court to withdraw these writ petitions with a liberty to approach the appellate forum.

¶47

4. Considering the aforesaid, these writ petitions are disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to prefer an appeal, in accordance with law.

¶48

5. Accordingly, these writ petitions stand disposed of.

¶49

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶50

(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

¶51

Suman/-

¶52

4

Birendra Prasad v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birendra Prasad 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Mahtha Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

M/S Steel Authority of India Ltd. Represented Thro Constituted Attorney Rajesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

M/S Steel Authority of India Ltd. Represented Thro Constituted Attorney Rajesh Kumar Cgm Law Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Niranjan Kumar Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S Chourasiya Stone Works, through Its Proprietor Namely Ajay Kumar Chourasiya Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary, Department of Industries Mines and Geology

Sundari Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand