( 1 ) IN this writ petition brought under Article 226 of the Constitution, primary question for consideration is whether the District Officer/collector has the jurisdiction to set aside and cancel his earlier order granting mining lease in favour of a person merely because the applications of certain others had not been considered at the time of granting the earlier lease as those applications were defective and no opportunity had been granted to remove the defects.

( 2 ) THE Collector, Mau issued a notice dated 24-4-1995 inviting applications for grant of mining lease under Chapter II of the U. P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred as the Rules ). In pursuance of that notice, 26 applications including the two made by the petitioners were received by the Collector. By an order dated 5-7-1995 mining leases were granted in favour of the petitioners. Accordingly, petitioner No. 1 was directed to deposit Rs. 3,21,300. 00 and petitioner No. 2 Rs. 86,062. 50p. within a period of seven days. The petitioners deposited the said amount within the specifiedperiod. In all, petitioner No. 1 has deposited Rs. 6,42,600. 00 and petitioner No. 2 Rs. 1,72,125.