Heard Mr. Rajiv Kumar, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners assisted by Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate.

2. Heard Mrs. Chandra Prabha, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State assisted by Mr. Vishal Kumar Rai, Advocate.

3. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondent nos. 7 & 8.

4. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :-

“For cancellation of agreement of lease dated 14.03.2010 allotted to Respondents no.7and 8 in a illegal and arbitrary manner ignoring the provision of law of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rule 2004 (JMM Rule 2004) as contained in (Annexure-8) which the respondents have granted lease for ten years with effect from 14.03.2010 to 13.03.2020 on the Raiyati Plots of the petitioner’s land without getting their consent being the owners of the land having the perfect title and possession over the property of Khata No.9 Plot No.462/(partly) area 6.50 acres and the same is mutated in the record of right in the name of petitioners. Further be please to grant of consequential relief/s, damages for misutilization of the area of the petitioners without getting his permissions/ written consent required under Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession) Rule 2004 (JMMC Rule 2004).

And

Further be pleased to take action against the C.O. Dhanwar and D.F.O Giridih for not informing or for surpressing the facts in his report regarding about the petitioners raiyati land which is acquired through Bihar Bhudan Yogya Committee. And

Further be pleased to direct the respondents to stay the execution/operation of the agreement of the lease dated 14.03.2010 granted to the respondent no.7 & 8 without following the rule of J.M.M.C. rule 2004 which is illegal and against the spirit of law.”

5. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners acquired following lands in Khata No. 9 Plot No.462 Mouza khairidih District-Giridih, under the provisions of Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954 through Bhoodan Yagna Committee, the petitioners’ name has been mutated in the revenue records and the petitioners have been paying rent to the Government :-

Petitioner no. 1	2 acres of land on 14.12.1987
Petitioner no. 2	2 acres of land on 14.12.1989
Petitioner no. 3	2 acres of land on 14.12.1989
Petitioner no. 4	2 acres of land on 14.12.1989

6. The grievance of the petitioners is that, inter alia, 87 decimal of land of petitioner no.1, 85 decimal of land of petitioner no.2, 47 decimal of land of petitioner no.3 and 41 decimal of land of petitioner no.4 has been given to respondent no.7 & 8 illegally by way of mining lease by the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih and by the District Mining Officer, Giridih without taking any consent from these petitioners.

7. He submits that some enquiry was made by the Circle Officer who gave a report as contained in Annexure-10 dated 13.09.2008, clearly stating that till the enquiry by the Circle Officer is over, the mining lease may not be granted.

8. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had filed representation dated 10.03.2010 (Annexure-11), before the Deputy Commissioner and another representation dated 08.03.2010 before the Additional Collector raising a grievance that the petitioners are in possession of their aforesaid property granted by Bihar Bhudan Yagya Committee and the same may not be given by way of lease to the respondent nos.7 and 8.

9. The grievance of the petitioners is that, in spite of this representations, the respondents have executed the lease deed as contained in Annexure-8 to this writ petition, which is dated 14.03.2010. According to the petitioners, the lease deed includes the aforesaid area of the petitioners which has been granted to the petitioners through the Bihar Bhoodan Yagya Committee.

10. The first point which has been raised by the writ petitioners is that the representation dated 10.0