KISSAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers : -

(2.) Heard Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(3.) Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate, has contended that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm. One Suleman had given consent through his affidavit dtd. 8/11/2023 to lift minor mineral from his land. Thereafter, on 9/11/2023, the petitioner submitted an application before the respondent no.3 by depositing Rs.10,000.00 - as fees for lifting minor mineral (mud-soil). The royalty was also deposited by the petitioner. Vide order dtd. 30/1/2024, the respondent no.2 granted permission with 18 conditions to lift the minor mineral. The said minor mineral was to be lifted within a month. Due to illness of the petitioner, he was not able to lift the minor mineral. Therefore, the petitioner had requested for further one month's time to lift the minor mineral through his application dtd. 11/3/2024. After inquiry, revenue team submitted its report on 23/10/2024 that the minor mineral has not been lifted from the spot, therefore, further time can be granted to the petitioner to lift the minor mineral. Respondent no.2 sent a letter to the respondent no.3 on 25/11/2024 mentioning that the minor mineral has not been lifted due to medical reason and permission is required to lift minor mineral as royalty and other necessary fees have already been deposited by the petitioner. But, no action has been taken on the said letter dtd. 25/11/2024.