SATYENDRA KUMAR TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in the present writ petitions is to the 26th and 27th amendment Rules introduced in the year 2004 in Uttar Pradesh Minor mineral (Concession) Rules 1963, whereby preferential rights have been created under the said Rules in favour of the persons belonging to socially and educationally backward classes and traditionally engaged in the profession of excavating sand and morrum for their livelihood. Since all these writ petitions relate to the same subject matter, the same are being heard together and the present order shall govern all these connected writ, petitions.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience and for appreciating the controversy, we find it appropriate to quote the 2 amendments namely the 26th and 27th amendments brought into by the State Government. These amendments which are presently under challenge, have been introduced in Rule 9 of the U. P. Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules 1963. By the 26th amendment, Rules 9-A and 53-A, as they then existed, were completely repealed and omitted. The 26th Amendment dated 22-6-2004 is as follows :-Column I Column II existing rule9. Preferential right of certain persons. Rule as hereby substit9. Preferential right o (1) Where two or more persons have appliedfor a mining lease in respect the sameland, the applicant whose applicationwas received earlier shall have a preferential right for the grant of leaseover the applicant, whose applicatio nwas received later:

(3.) THE 27th Amendment dated 16-10-2004 introduced is as follows :column-I COLLUM existing clause Clause as her (e) In respect of mining lease for sand or (e) In respect of minimorrum or bajri or boulder or any of these or morrum or bajri orin mixed state, exclusively found in the river these in mixed state, bed, if other things are equal, preference the river bed, if otheshall be given to a person or group of per-preference shall be gisons, whether incorporated or not who have group of persons, whetobtained a certificate in Form MM-14 from not who be- long to sothe concerned District Officer, or such other educationally backwardofficer authorized in this behalf by the State Mallah Themer, Kewat BGovernment, certifying that such person/ Batham Dhiwar, Chai, persons is/are traditionally engaged in ex-Raikwar, Kaiwrt, Khulwcavation or sand /morrum for their liveli- (Godia and Kashyap) anhood and who are resident of the district of citizens, as notififor which the application has been given. Government from time t obtained a certificate from the concerned Dis such other Officer aut behalf by the State Going that such person/ptraditionally engagedsand/morrum for theirwho are resident of th for which the applicat