AWADHESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notice dated 16-2-2006 issued by the District Magistrate, hamirpur (Annexure 1 to the writ petition ). Further a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the District Magistrate, hamirpur to issue fresh notice in accordance with 1963 Rules.

(2.) THE facts arising out of the present writ petition are that a notice dated 17th September, 2006 issued under Rule 72 of the u. P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 is liable to be set aside as this is in contravention of Rule 24 of the Rules. The aforesaid notice has never been pasted on notice board or any publication in two newspapers have been made. Rule 72 (1) of the 1963 Rules provides for a declaration that a particular area has become available for re-grant of mining leases specifying a date from which applications will be invited. The said date shall not be earlier than thirty days from the date of notice. Rule 72 is being quoted below :-

(3.) FROM the perusal of the aforesaid rule, it is clear that the notice should specify a date from which the applications for grant of mining lease are to be submitted. It further provides that notice is to be issued after the area becomes available for re-grant and not during the subsistence of the mining lease, therefore, if any notice has been issued during subsistence of the lease is in contravention of Rule 72 and is liable to be quashed only on this ground.