SANTOSH KUMAR GOEL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vishnu Pratap learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents and perused the record.

(2.) THE petitioner, who held earlier mining lease, which was to expire, submitted an application for renewal, as contemplated under Rule 6 -A, U. P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. The said application was found in order under Rules 6 -A read with Rule 6 of the said Rules, 1963. There was no application/prayer to condone delay in filing this application.

(3.) THE petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19 -5 -2006 passed by respondent No. 1/State of U. P. (annexure -9 of the writ petition) and also a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents -authorities to condone the delay of 7 days in filing the lease and another writ of mandamus to direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to sign the lease deed and other usual lease deed.