NAIN SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the constitutional validity of the amendment made in M. P. Minor Mineral Rules, 1996, published in M. P. Gazette dated 30-5-2001 (Annexure-P/5)and are also challenging the correctness, validity and propriety of the communication dated 31-12 2001 (Annexure-P/6) and the order dated 6-2-2002 (Annexure-P/8) under which the quarry permit issued in favour of the Society of which the present petitioner is the President was cancelled.

(2.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the original Chapter-VI of m. P. Minor Mineral Rules, 1996 containing rule 38 (4) which related to preferential right reads as under :-

(3.) THE say of the petitioner is that the society headed by him is a Co-operative Society. The members of which are belonging to Scheduled Tribe and in view of preferential rights they were entitled to and were infact granted the quarry permit. According to them, vide Gazette Notification No. F-19-10-99-XII-2 published on 30-5-2001, original Chapter-VI has been amended and instead of grant of quarry permit on basis of preferential rights, the quarries are required to be auctioned. The submission of the petitioner is that the validity of their permit was upto 23-3-2002 but before the expiry of the period vide order dated 6-2-2002, the quarry permit was cancelled and this action on the part of the respondent is bad, firstly because the petitioners were not allowed to exploit the permit till the date of expiry and because the provisions of Rules 36 to 40 as amended, are ultra vires the constitution.