JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP KUMAR, J.

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

i. To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorarı for quashing the notice contained letter no. 360 dated 03.03.2023 issued by the Respondent Managing Director, Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited whereby and whereunder a penalty of Rs.96,97,705/- has been levied upon the petitioner for allegedly excavating 90060 cubic feet sand from beyond the permissible environment clearance area;

ii. Consequent to grant of relief no (i) above, this Hon'ble Court may issue further appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to refund the penalty amount of Rs.96,97,705/- deposited by the petitioner on 03.03.2023.

iii. This Hon'ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that Respondent Managing Director is not the competent authority to levy penalty upon a settlee under Rule 30(1) of the 2019 Rules.

iv. This Hon'ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that penalty cannot be levied upon a valid settee under Rule 56(2) of the 2019 Rules.

v. This Hon'ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that letter no. 360 dated 03.03.2023 issued by the Respondent Managing Director is bad in the eyes of law since the same has been issued in glaring violation of the principles of natural justice as the petitioner has not been afforded any show cause notice whatsoever to controvert the allegations upon which the penalty has been levied.

vi. This Hon'ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that the levy of penalty contained in letter no.360 dated 03.03.2023 is in gross violation of the maxim audi alteram partem as the petitioner has been condemned unheard without an opportunity to defend the charges against it.

vii. This Hon'ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that the imposition of penalty upon the petitioner is in violation of the 2019 Rules?”

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent - Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited had published a notice inviting e-auction for selection of sub- contractors for operation of sand ghats in the district of Bhojpur. The petitioner had participated in the said tender process and being the highest bidder, he was awarded Khangaon (Bahiyara) sand ghat after quoting an amount of Rs.5,53,41,610/-. Thereafter, the petitioner had deposited the requisite amount and accordingly, work order was issued in his favour.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that an agreement was also executed between the petitioner and the respondent- Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited which was registered on 27.06.2022. Thereafter, the petitioner started carrying out the mining activities, but all of a sudden the Managing Director of the Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited issued the impugned letter dated 03.03.2023, whereby a penalty of Rs.96,97,705/- was levied upon the petitioner for excavating the sand beyond the permissible mining area and the petitioner was directed to deposit the penalty amount within 24 hours.

4. According to the petitioner, he had deposited the penalty amount under compulsion and threat of restriction on generation of e-transit challans.

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order of penalty dated 03.03.2023 indicates that on 24.02.2023 and 25.02.2023 inspection was conducted and it was found that the signboard and boundary wall were not erected and the sand was found to have been excavated outside the permissible area, however, neither the petitioner was intimated about any inspection nor the alleged inspection was conducted in his presence. It has further been submitted that neither show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor any inspection report was provided to him before imposing the penalty.

6. It is the categorical submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not excavated the sand beyond the permissible area and the imposition of penalty o