The court emphasized expedited consideration of interlocutory applications related to mining violations under the Mines and Minerals Act.

Signature Not Verified UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following Digita lly s ign ed b y O R D E R Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2025.10.18 Reason:

1. The petitioners have already moved an application before the High Court for release of the vehicles. In the order impugned before us, the High Court has also recorded filing of the said interlocutory application. The relevant portion of the order dated

14.07.2025 is reproduced hereunder :-

“6. The scope of the PIL pending before this Court is not restrained to mere seismological impacts on account of the mining activity, but, also the gross violations in the conduct of mining operations;

7. Intervention applications are preferred by owners of the machinery that were seized pursuant to the directions of this Court. It is their contention that they had nothing to do with the mining operations and that they had merely hired the machinery.

8. The legality of the use of the machinery has been gone into by this Bench on a prima facie basis and in that view, the issue requires to be considered in terms of Section 21 , in particular, sub-section 4(a) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.

9. Counter-affidavit, if any, to IA No. 55 of 2025 and IA No.60 of 2025, be filed in two weeks.

10. List this case on 28.08.2025. Learned Chief Standing Counsel to produce the deliberations of the Expert Committee.”

2. In view of above, we request the High Court to take up and disposed of the interlocutory application expeditiously.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has also brought to our notice an order passed by this Court on 16.09.2025 in SLP (C) No. 19820 of 2025. Petitioner(s) may place the above order before the High Court for its consideration.

4. With these observations, the Special Leave Petition, along with I.A.No.239007/2025 for directions, is disposed of. Delay, if any, is condoned.

5. All accompanying interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (NIDHI WASON)

ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.6 SECTION III-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 42733/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-01-2025 in WPPIL No. 174/2024 14-07-2025 in WPPIL No. 174/2024 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital]

PARIHAR MINERAL PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. Respondent(s)

(IA No. 239007/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE APPLICATION FOR DIRECTION)

Date : 13-10-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL S. CHANDURKAR For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Dubey, Adv.

Ms. Meenakshi Parihar, Adv.

Mr. Abhishek Shrivastav, Adv.

Ms. Maitri Goal, Adv.

Mr. Ashish Kumar Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Rittik Pandey, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.

Mr. Kamal Kumar Pandey, Adv.

Mrs. Vatsala Tripathi, Adv.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, Adv.

Mr. Shashank Singh, AOR Dr. Aman Rab, Adv.

Ms. Payal Bhatia Mohanty, Adv.

Mr. Madhu Sudan Singh, Adv.

Mr. Abhinav Garg, AOR Mr. Rahul Singh Latwal, Adv.

Mr. Manwendra Gautam, Adv.

Mr. Vishal Rajput, Adv.

Mr. Rahul Latwal, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

IA NO. 239007/25

1. The petitioners have already moved an application before the High Court for release of the vehicles. In the order impugned before us, the High Court has also recorded filing of the said interlocutory application. The relevant portion of the order dated

14.07.2025 is reproduced hereunder :-

“6. The scope of the PIL pending before this Court is not restrained to mere seismological impacts on account of the mining activity, but, also the gross violations in the conduct of mining operations;

7. Intervention applications are preferred by owners of the machinery that were seized pursuant to the directions of this Court. It is their c