AJAY KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question that arises for consideration in this petition is whether on renewal of mining lease, the term of renewed mining lease would commence from the date on which the renewed mining lease deed was executed or from the next date of expiry of earlier lease?

(2.) The petitioner was granted mining lease on 27.1.1999 for a period of five years, which was to expire on 26.1.2004. As per the provision of Rule 6-A of Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules 1963 (in brief the Rules), the application for renewal of lease had to be made by the lease holder six months before the expiry of lease. The petitioner made an application on 2.7.2003 for renewal of his mining lease. This application remained pending and meanwhile the lease period of petitioner came to an end on 26.1.2004. The District Magistrate, Mirzapur did not pass any order on the renewal application and the order was passed after more than three years. The order for renewal of mining lease was passed by the then District Magistrate, Mirzapur on 19.8.2006 and the order was issued on 21.8.2006 granting renewal of mining lease for a period of five years. This order was complied by the respondents on 12.10.2007 when renewed mining lease deed was executed on 12.10.2007 till 26.1.2009. It was also mentioned in the renewed mining lease deed that the petitioner had to pay annual dead rent in advance on 27.1.2004, 27.12.2005, 27.12.2006 and 27.12.2008. Since the earlier mining lease of the petitioner had expired on 26.1.2004 he could not work or carry out mining operation for a period of more than three years. The petitioner made a representation to the District Magistrate, Mirzapur on 25.3.2008 that the period of his mining lease be extended so that he may carry out mining for a full period of five years and the period from 27.1.2004 to 11.10.2007 be not counted in the renewed mining lease of five years. It was also stated in the representation by the petitioner that after the expiry of mining lease on 26.1.2004 the petitioner did not carry out any mining.

(3.) We have heard Sri Shyam Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Alok Kumar Singh and Sri Vishnu Pratap, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.