Maa Vindhya Stone Crusher Company vs State of U. P.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(All) 1522

SIDDHARTHA VARMA, SHEKHAR B. SARAF
Maa Vindhya Stone Crusher Company – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Udit Chandra, Nitesh Patel

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner was granted a mining lease for 10 years commencing from 15.7.2016 and ending on 14.7.2026 for the purpose of mining and crushing stone. The petitioner for the purposes of conveyance etc. was also issued Form -MM-11 and regularly OTPs were provided for effective use of the MM-11 Forms.

2. On 17.7.2023, while the petitioner was still operating his mines as per the mining lease dated 15.7.2016 he received a notice on his E-mail Id where the allegation was that illegal mining had been done by him outside the area for which the mining lease was granted and, therefore, he had violated the Rules 3 and 58 of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals. (Concession) Rules, 2021. This notice itself had raised a demand of Rs. 1,70,06,000/-. As the petitioner was finding the notice arbitrary, he filed the instant writ petition.

3. When the writ petition was filed, this Court had asked the learned Standing Counsel to take instructions. However, on 10.8.2023, this Court directed the petitioner to file a reply to the notice. This order was passed in the presence of the learned Standing Counsel. The order dated 10.8.2023 itself says that the learned Standing Counsel was to inform th