LANDMARK ENGINEER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking direction towards the respondents No. 2 & 3, for grant of Quarry Lease by overriding the objection raised vide communication dtd. 27/1/2025 by the Deputy Director (Mining) by which the petitioner has been directed to seek permission from the Collector as the land in question belongs to Scheduled Tribe category candidate.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that the direction has been issued by the respondent No. 3/ Deputy Director (Mining) by referring provisions of 165 (6) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (henceforth 'the CGLRC') to get the consent letter executed by land owners to be registered and take permission of respondent No. 2 under Sec. 165 (6) of the CGLRC (wrongly mentioned as 156 (6) in the communication dtd. 27/1/2025) and Sec. 168 of the CGLRC. He further submits that Sec. 165 (6) of the CGLRC is not applicable over the quarry lease since the provision itself excludes its applicability by way of explanation which states that for the purpose of this sub-sec. the expression "otherwise" shall not include lease. He further submits that Sec. 168 of the CGLRC is not applicable in the present case, as the petitioner has not taken the private land of the land owners on lease which forms part of Quarry Lease and it has simply taken the consent of the land owners for undertaking Quarry Operation over the subject area in terms of Rule 42 (2) (c) of C.G. Minor Mineral Rules, 2015. Hence, the order directing the petitioner to take permission under Sec. 165 (6) is absolutely illegal and further prays that the respondents be directed to grant order of Quarry Lease by overriding the objection raised by respondent No.3 vide communication dtd. 27/1/2025.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent/ state submits that the petitioner has not submitted consent of land owners for taking Quarry operation in terms of Rule 42 (2) (c) of C.G. Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 as also the order of permission from Collector. He further submits that the consent to be taken from land owners is only to protect the interest of land owners belonging to Scheduled tribe category and there is no illegality in the communication dated dtd. 27/1/2025 issued by respondent No. 3.