Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Maa Durga Stone Works – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology – Respondent
ORDER :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following relief:
“(i).For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing and setting aside Letter issued vide Memo No. 1329/M dated 30.12.2023 passed by Respondent no.2 [Annexure-7], in alleged exercise of power under Rule 54 of JHARKHAND MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES , 2004, especially because Respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction and/or authority to pass such order, and, further, said order has been passed in utter violation of principles of natural justice.”
2. The matter was taken up on 28th July, 2025, to which one of us [Sujit Narayan Prasad, J] was a member. On the said date following order was passed:
“1.The matter can be heard if the petitioner deposits at least 50% of the demand amount.
2. Place the matter after the amount is deposited.”
3. Pursuant thereto, an Interlocutory Application being I.A. No. 14290 of 2025 has been filed by the petitioner making a prayer for recall of order dated 28th July, 2025, inter alia, on the ground that the decision which has been sought to be quashed has been passe
Penalty order under minor mineral rules by authority lacking jurisdiction is void; quashed and remitted to competent authority for fresh adjudication despite subsequent power conferment.
The Deputy Commissioner exceeded jurisdiction by terminating a mining lease without proper delegation and violating natural justice principles.
Authority in mining matters transitioned from Tahasildar to Mining Officer under amended Rules, quashing unlawful orders.
The court established that a violation of natural justice renders administrative actions invalid, necessitating a fair hearing and reasoned decisions.
The failure to consider a party's explanation before adverse action constitutes a violation of natural justice, rendering the decision arbitrary.
The disciplinary authority that initiates proceedings must be the appointing authority; actions taken by a subordinate authority are illegal and violate principles of natural justice.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements in administrative actions, particularly the right to a hearing and jurisdictional limits post-mineral classification changes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
