TAJ ROYALTY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing the condition No. 8 of the notice dated 4. 12. 2007 issued by additional District Magistrate (Administration), Bijnor, respondent No. 3 and notice dated 16. 10. 2007 issued by the same authority.

(2.) WE have heard Shri Mukesh Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vishnu Pratap, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(3.) IT appears from the contents of the petition that on 16. 10. 2007, a notice was issued by District Magistrate, Bijnor under Rule 72 of the U. P. Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter called as 'rules') declaring availability of 25 acres area for grant of mining lease for a period of three years, under Chapter II of the said Rules, in District Bijnor and inviting applications after expiry of the period of one month for the date of notice. In pursuance of notice issued by the respondent No. 2, the petitioner firm applied in Form M. M.-1 for grant of mining lease for plots mentioned in para 5 of the writ petition measuring 20. 83 acres in village Barampur, Tehsil Nagina, District Bijnor. The respondent No. 3 issued a notice (Annexure-3) dated 4. 12. 2007, informing the petitioner that his application was incomplete and he was asked to remove the shortcomings between the period of 5th December 2007 to 13th December 2007 and a warning was also given that if the application was not completed within the said period then after awaiting only 7 days it could be presumed that the petitioner has nothing to say in this regard.