S C DOGRA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ petitions can conveniently be disposed of by a single judgment, as questions of facts and law involved in these writ petitions are similar.

(2.) For understanding the facts and the matters in controversy the facts of Civil Writ Petition No. 276 of 1981 are being stated. The petitioners are carrying on the business of mining operations, in the name and style "M/s. Dogra Stone Crusher" in village Chhakdal. District Simla. They were getting short term permits under Rule 24 of the Himachal Minor Minerals (Concession) Revised Rules. 1971 hereinafter called 'Rules') and were depositing royalty, etc. for this purpose.

(3.) The petitioners applied for a short term permit on 22nd Sept. 1981 but this permit was not issued. The petitioners now allege that the land upon which they were carrying on business is the ownership of their father and uncle, who have allowed the petitioners to occupy the land for working mining operations. Under Article 300A of the Constitution the owners cannot be deprived of their rights in the minerals or in the lands. They further allege that short term permits have been refused on the instructions of the Government because the Government decided to close all stone crushers and quarries working in Saniauli. Dhalli and Shoghi, and on all National and State Highways. A letter, dated 29th Sept. 1981 was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Simla, conveying the decision of the Government. The petitioners have challenged the orders of the Government chiming the same to be null and void and also violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. It is further alleged that the executive orders or the instructions have no value and that Rules 24 to 27 of the Rules are not applicable. The validity of Rule 24 of the Rules is also challenged.