RAVI SHANKAR NAIK Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated 12-12-2011 (Annexure P-11). passed by respondent No. 2- Collector, District Chhatarpur. In short, the facts are these. The petitioner was granted quarry lease by the Collector. Chhatarpur, vide order dated 15-2-2008 for a period of two years (2008-09 and 2009-10) in respect of sand over land bearing Khasra No. 561. area 14.500 hectare, situated at Village Parei, Tehsil Gaurihar. Cane River. District Chhatarpur. The petitioner thereafter deposited the required security amount of Rs. 10.53 lac with the Collector and also paid the installments without any default. The quarry for sand was. however, stopped by the Collector after about one year vide order dated 28-2-2009 in compliance of interim order dated 19-2-2009 passed by this High Court in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 1574/2008. The petitioner states that he could not operate the quarry from 19-3-2009. The High Court ultimately dismissed Writ Petition (PIL) No. 1574/2008 vide order dated 29-9-2010, but in the meantime the period of two years of quarry lease granted to petitioner expired. He, therefore. made a representation dated 12-10-2010 to the Collector for allowing him to operate the sand quarry for a full period of two years Since no order was being passed on the representation the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 15338/2010 for a direction to the Collector to decide the same. We. by our order dated 15-11-2010. finally disposed of Writ Petition No. 15338/2010 and directed the Collector to decide the representation by a speaking order within a period of one month. But the Collector has rejected the representation by order dated 12-12-2011 on the ground that there is no provision for extension of quarry lease in the Madhya Pradesh Minor Minerals Rules. 1996. The Collector has also held that the extension clause available in the agreement is not applicable in this case as the same is applicable only in respect of cases where the execution of the agreement is to be made. It is in this background the petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of order dated 12-12-2011 and also for a direction to the Collector to allow him to operate the sand quarry for a full period of two years.

(2.) Admittedly, there was no fault on the part of petitioner due to which he was stopped from operating the sand quarry. As already stated above, quarry lease granted to him was for a period of two years and he operated the same without any complaint till the passing of order dated 28-2-2009 by the Collector. The Collector had passed the order stopping the petitioner to operate the sand quarry in compliance of the interim order dated 19-2-2009 of the High Court in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 1574/2008, which was finally dismissed on 29-9-2010. But, in the meantime, the remaining period of petitioner's quarry lease of two years expired. It is well settled that "any procedure or course of action which does not ensure a reasonable quick adjudication has been termed to be unjust. Such a course is stated to be contrary to the maxim 'actus curiae neminem gravabit', that an act of the Court shall prejudice none" [See: Anil Rai Vs. State of Bihar, 2001 7 SCC 318, Para 2). Admittedly, no third party interest has been created on the land of which quarry lease was granted to the petitioner. The sand quarry has remained unoperated for the period for which the period of operation falls short of two years. The petitioner was deprived without his fault to operate the sand quarry for full period of the quarry lease In Beg Raj Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2003 1 SCC 726, the Supreme Court has held that where petitioner was wrongfully disallowed to operate the mining lease for the full lease period and the lease has remained unoperated and no third-party right is created, he must be allowed to operate the mining for the full period of lease subject to adjustment for the period for which he has already operated. The present case is identical to the case of Beg Raj Singh .

(3.) For these reasons, we quash the order dated 12-12-2011 passed by the Collector, Chhatarpur. We also direct that the petitioner shall be allowed to operate the sand quarry for a full period of two years subject to adjustment for the period for which he has already operated. Needless to mention that the petitioner shall remain liable to pay royalty and make other payments to the State Government in accordance with the terms of the quarry lease. The petition is allowed subject to above terms.