Back
ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, JAYANT BANERJI
Raj Pratap Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Hon’ble Jayant Banerji, J.)
1. Under challenge in the present petition are: a notice dated 30.6.2023 issued by the District Magistrate to the petitioner directing him to deposit all the dues relating to the surrender of the lease, failing which, the lease granted to the petitioner would be cancelled; the order dated 4.8.2023 passed by the District Magistrate, Deoria, whereby while cancelling the mining lease granted to the petitioner, the earnest money deposited by the petitioner has been directed to be forfeited; and the consequential order dated 7.8.2023 whereby an amount of Rs. 39,54,600/- payable towards the 6th and 7th instalments in respect of mining lease has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the State-respondent decided to allot sand mining rights through e-tendering/e-auction pertaining to a sand mining site near Ghaghra river over plot no. 396/1, area 11.7 hectares situated in Tehsil Salempur, District Deoria, for mining 1,17,000 cubic meters per year of sand. The petitioner deposited earnest money of Rs. 19,01,250/-. The petitioner was the highest bidder, his bid being Rs. 169/- per cubic meter, and a lette
The authority can forfeit a mining lease security deposit for non-payment of lease installments under the terms established in the lease agreement, affirming contractual obligations.
The Mines Tribunal has the authority to determine lease terms for mining operations under statutory provisions, affirming that statutory leases are bound by the same conditions as contractual ones, i....
The court clarified the specific penalty that could be imposed for non-compliance with the mining plan provision within one month of receiving the Letter of Intent, and emphasized the requirement for....
Point of law: State Government have not so far issued any notification in terms of Section 17A, the Industrial Policy–2007 of the Kerala State Government does not have the effect of making a valid re....
Merely because Rule 15(1) and its proviso of 2017 Rules was mentioned in the order of the Commissioner would not make the Rule applicable. Wrong mention of a provision cannot make the provision appli....
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
