RAMESH PRASAD VERMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS order shall dispose of C.W.J.C. No. 15828/2001 and C.W.J.C. No. 478/ 2002.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submit that in a long drawn litigation, lease was granted in favour of each of the petitioners with a permission in their favour to collect boulders, rubbles, small piece of pebbles etc. from the river bed. Accordingly to them the collection of these items though strictly does not fall within the meaning of mining but as the technical definition says it to be a mining, the petitioners were entitled to an order in their favour for mining. According to them in the year 1994 after the approval of the Central Government the lease were granted in favour of the petitioners. It is further contended by them that the monitoring team of the Centra! Government made certain inspection and submitted its report. In the said report certain observations were made against the interest of the petitioners but in any case the report was in favour of each of the petitioners. They further say that the State Government not satisfied with the said report, challenged the correctness and validity of the said report and made certain recommendation to the Central Government for recall of its sanction granted under section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act. They further submit that the Central Government without hearing the petitioners or without taking into consideration its earlier reports and the sanctions, recalled its earliers order and annulled the sanction earlier granted and directed the State Government to cancel the lease. The petitioners submit that apart from the facts relating to malafides etc. which are floating on the surface of the records, it would be clear that principles of natural justice have been violated through and through and the petitioners, who had been granted mining lease in their favour till 2004, have been unceremoniously removed from the area and as the order passed by the Central Government was to have civil consequences, it was all the more for the Central Government to hear the petitioner before passing an order against their interest.