KUTUMINA CONSTRUCTION PVT LIMITED Vs. COLLECTOR KHURDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction to provide necessary protection to the men and machineries operating in the sand quarry of Kuakhai River leased out in his favour and also for further direction to take action on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged on behalf of the petitioner-company.

(2.) Case of the petitioner is that in the year 1995 it had applied to the Tahsildar for grant of lease in respect of sand quarry for a term of five years in mouza Mancheswar pertaining to Khata No. 555, Plot No. 1297 extending to an area of Ac. 27.17 decimals and plot No. 725 extending to an area of Ac. 121.35 decimals. The sand quarry was settled in favour of the petitioner for a period of three years on payment of annual royalty of Rs. 2, 50,000/- along with ground rent of Rs. 400/- and deed rent of Rs. 800/-. After depositing the said amount provisional work order was issued in favour of the petitioner. There were some difficulties with regard to execution of the lease deed for which the petitioner approached this Court in OJC No. 7689/97. This Court while disposing of the writ application held that non-production of registered lease deed was due to pendency of impounding case and not for any fault of the petitioner and directed the authorities to consider petitioner's case for working out the quarry in question for a period of three years. Subsequently long term lease for a period of three years was granted in favour of the petitioner with effect from 25-4-2000 and the petitioner was allowed to operate the source for one year with effect from 25-4-2000 to 24-4-2001 by order dated 27-4-2000. Prior to the issuance of the order dated 27-4-2000 the opposite party No. 2 by order dated 19-2-2000 had permitted the petitioner to construct an approach road for plying of vehicles to transport extracted sand from Kuakhai river bed and after due demarcation of the land for the purpose of construction of the road the petitioner has constructed the approach road. When the petitioner made all arrangements to operate sand quarry after rainy season the residents of local village started trouble and did not allow the work to be undertaken. The approach road was breached at several places as a result of which vehicles could not come near the river to lift sand and the workers engaged for extraction of sand were threatened by the villagers, as a result of which the quarry operation could not take place. Information was lodged in the local police station about the conduct of the local villagers in preventing operation of the quarry, threatening to workers and assaulting the drivers and damaging the vehicles, but no action was taken and the petitioner was not able to operate the quarry.

(3.) Counter has been filed on behalf of opposite parties 3 and 4 wherein it is stated that though by order dated 27-4-2000 the Sub -Collector, Bhubaneswar has approved the long term lease of Kuakhai river sand, for a period of three years, it has been allowed to operate the source for a period of one year from 25-4-2000 to 24-4-2001. The petitioner instead of constructing approach road in Mancheswar side approached the Tahsildar to make the approach road from Naharkanta side and in the process he went to lift sand from Naharkanta side of Kuakhai river which was opposed to and objected by the villagers of Naharkanta, Haridaspur, Hansapal, Sundarpatna, Rudrapur, Banguria and Muspatna on the ground that if sand is extracted it would affect river bank. Kuakhai River Embankment Surakhya Samiti established in the year 1948 by the villagers of these villages also objected to lifting of sand on the ground that the sand heaps worked as a barrier and protected those villages from flood and if sand is allowed to be lifted it may weaken the river bank which may be affected during flood. A meeting was called in which villagers and representative of the petitioner were present, but it yielded no result. The I.I.C. of the concerned police station has submitted F.R. against both the parties under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that steps have been taken on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged on behalf of the petitioner.