KARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Smt. Poonam Srivastava learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Yogesh Agarwal 1 for respondent No. 3.

(2.) The petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents to grant lease for Pheri Khurd, block No. 1 in favour of respondent No. 3 on the basis of his application moved in 1995.

(3.) It appears that an application of respondent No. 3 for grant of mining lease for 3 years from 1995 to 1998 was accepted by the authorities vide Annexure-2 to the petition but the lease deed was not executed because of an interim order of the Lucknow Bench of this Court dated 9.2.1996 vide Annexure-CA2 in Writ Petition No. 437 (MB) of 1996. This writ petition was subsequently withdrawn on 9.10.1998 vide Annexure-CA4. The respondent No. 3 deposited a sum of Rs. 6,11,062.50 as first instalment of the lease amount vide Annexure-CA2. However, due to the interim order of the Lucknow Bench the lease deed could not be executed. Thereafter the respondent No. 3 moved an application to the Director who opined that the lease should be executed vide order 20.11.1998. Annexure-CA6. However, no lease was granted in favour of respondent No. 3, and hence he made a representation dated 12.1.2000 to the District Magistrate, Jalaun, praying that he be given similar treatment as Raghunath and Gharai who had obtained orders in their favour from the Lucknow Bench on 23.5.1996 vide Annexure-CA7 and order 11.12.1997 vide Annexure-CA8. The respondent No. 3 also filed Writ Petition No. 4576 of 2000 before Lucknow Bench which was disposed of on 11.9.2000 vide Annexure-CA12. Consequently, the District Magistrate, Jalaun, passed an order dated 26.10.2000 increasing the lease amount and the respondent No. 3 deposited the said amount with the Officer Incharge.