RAVI SHANKAR NAYAK Vs. RAJA BHAIYA PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 calling in question certain observations and directions issued by the Writ Court in its order dated 5.8.2013 passed in W.P. No.8620/2013.

(2.) Facts in brief goes to show that the Mining Department in the State of Madhya Pradesh issued a auction notice for the purpose of quarrying of sand in an area measuring 14.5 hectares situated in village Paria, Tehsil Gaurihar, District Chhatarpur. It is seen that the appellant herein and respondent No.1 participated in the auction proceedings that was held on 15.2.2008 and being a successful bidder, the bid was finalized in favour of the appellant. The appellant was granted the quarry lease for a period of two years from 19.2.2008 to 18.2.2010. The formalities for grant of lease was completed and a lease agreement was executed between the parties. However, in the meanwhile, a Public Interest Litigation was filed before this Court by one Shri Ajay Dubey which was registered as W.P. No.1578/2008. Before filing of this writ petition, the appellant operated the quarry in accordance to the lease agreement for about a period of one year. In the meanwhile, due to certain interim order passed in the Public Interest Litigation filed by Shri Ajay Dubey, working in the quarry lease was stopped. Finally, the Public Interest Litigation was disposed of. It is said that when the Public Interest Litigation was pending, due to an interim order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 19.2.2009 the M.P. State Mining Corporation issued the Notification and from 28.2.2009 the appellant was prevented from carrying out the mining operation. It is said that they were directed to obtain "No Objection" or consent from the Pollution Control Board and when the area was tried to be auctioned again, the appellant challenged the same by filing a Writ Petition before this Court being W.P. No.15338/2010 and on 15.11.2010 the said writ petition was disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may submit a representation and the competent authority shall consider it sympathetically. The representation was rejected on 12.12.2011 and therefore, appellant again filed W.P. No.2187/2011 before this Court and vide order Annexure A/1 the said Writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, based on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Anil Rai Vs. State of Bihar, 2001 7 SCC 318, the following directions were issued in the said writ petition :-

(3.) It is said that in pursuance to the order passed vide Annexure A/2 dated 15.4.2013, the Collector, Chhatarpur granted permission to the appellant to carry out the mining operation for the period when the appellant was prevented from carrying out the mining operation and challenging this order, respondent No.1 filed the petition in question before the learned Single Judge. After hearing all concerned, the learned Single Judge by the order in question passed on 5.8.2013 found that the respondent No.1 had no locus standi to file the petition and therefore, held that the petition is liable to be dismissed. However, having held so, it is said in para 4 the matter was decided in the following manner :-