Allahabad High Court
M/S Awasthi Traders Thru. Prop. Sh. ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Geology And ... on 10 June, 2022
Author: Rajeev Singh
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH Reserved Court No. - 27 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4491 of 2021 Petitioner :- M/S Awasthi Traders Thru. Prop. Sh. Susheel Chandra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Geology And Mining Lko. And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Pushpila Bisht Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Abhinav Narain Trivedi, learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record as also the records of Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 and Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020.
2. The petition has been filed seeking the following prayers:
"1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 22.01.2021 passed by the respondent no. 1 in Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition.
2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 07.12.2020 passed by the respondent no. 1 in Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, as contained in Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition.
3. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 30.05.2020 passed by the respondent no. 3, as contained in Annexure No. 17 to the writ petition.
4. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the advertisement dated 02.06.2020 to the extent it relates to serial no. 6, as contained in Annexure No. 19 to the writ petition.
5. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order Letter of Intent dated 19.06.2020 and permit (after summoning the same in original) issued in favour of the respondent no. 5, as contained in Annexure No. 24 to the writ petition.
6. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to allow the petitioner to undertake mining activity in pursuance to the lease deed dated 06.11.2018 in respect of area Khand No. 29/1 situated in Village Bakchhakhadar, Tehsil Maudaha, District Hamirpur."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Department of Geology and Mining, Government of U.P., by means of Government Order dated 14.08.2017 issued a declaration under Rule 23 of Minor Minerals Rules, 1963 to grant mining leases of riverbed minerals by means of E-commerce under the provisions of Chapter IV of Rule, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the ''Rules'), in pursuance of which, an advertisement was issued by District Magistrate, Hamirpur in respect of Khand No. 29/1 situated in village Bakchhakhadar, Tehsil Maudaha, District Hamirpur for an area measuring 12.145 hc. for a quantity of 1,94,304 cubic meters per year sand/morrum. It has been submitted that petitioner participated in the process of said E-auction-cum-tender and being the highest bidder of Rs.857 per cubic meters, the Letter of Intent was issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, he deposited the due amount and got the mining plan prepared and was also granted the environmental clearance on 24.11.2018. (Environmental clearance dated 24.11.2018 is annexed as Annexure No. 4). It is also submitted that after issuance of environmental clearance, the petitioner was granted mining lease and the lease deed was executed on 06.11.2018 for a period of 27.11.2018 to 26.11.2023.
4. In the meantime, environmental clearance given to the petitioner as well as other persons was challenged before the National Green Tribunal in OA Nos. 263 of 2018 and 264 of 2018. The National Green Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ''Tribunal') quashed the environmental clearance granted to 36 lease holders on 25.09.2019, in pursuance of which, respondent no. 3, District Magistrate, Hamirpur vide order dated 30.09.2019 stopped the mining activity of the petitioner till further orders or till the orders passed by the Tribunal. (Copy of the order dated 30.09.2019 is annexed as Annexure No. 6). Thus, the petitioner could not undertake mining activity. The order of the Tribunal was challenged by the State of U.P. before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 8590 of 2019 and vide order dated 13.12.2019, Hon'ble Apex Court quashed the order dated 25.09.2019 passed by the Tribunal as well as all consequential orders and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh decision. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tribunal again passed an order dated 17.12.2019 directing the parties to maintain status quo as also to treat the earlier order passed by the Tribunal dated 25.09.2019, as interim order. Order dated 17.12.2019 was challenged by the State of Uttar Pradesh by filing Civil Appeal No. 54-55 of 2020 before the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 13th January, 2020 stayed the operation and implementation of the order of Tribunal dated 17.12.2019 passed in OA Nos. 263 of 2018 and 264 of 2018. (Copy of the order dated 13.01.2020 passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 54-55 of 2020 is annexed as Annexure No. 7). Thereafter, the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 23.01.2020 passed in the aforesaid civil appeal, stayed the proceedings of OA Nos. 263 of 2018 and 264 of 2018 pending before the Tribunal till the lease holders are not made parties.
5. On 23rd January, 2020, the Tribunal passed an order allowing the impleadment of the lease holders and posted the matter for hearing on 26.03.2020. Thereafter, District Magistrate passed an order permitting mining activity. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as the hearing was going on before the Tribunal in the matter related to environmental clearance of the petitioner also and date was fixed on 26.03.2020, the petitioner had not started mining. In the meantime, on 24.03.2020, the National Disaster Management Authority declared a complete lockdown in the entire country invoking the provisions of National Disaster Management Act, 2005 due to Pandemic Covid 19, which was extended vide order dated 14.04.2020. On 17.04.2020, State Government issued an order providing relaxation in the payment of royalty. However, since the manpower was not available and due to Pandemic Covid-19, the mining activity was difficult in April, 2020, another Government Order dated 11th May, 2020 was issued providing that the permission given to those lease holders having dues till 31st March, 2020 to carry out mining, provided they deposit their dues upto 31.05.2020. It has further been submitted that as the petitioner could not undertake any mining in respect of lease area due to order of the Tribunal as well as lockdown, as also the petitioner was not informed by any notice about the dues. On 28.05.2020, the State Government issued Government order providing the waiver of the dues for the period, in which, mining was stopped in compliance of the earlier orders. (Copy of the order dated 28.05.2020 is annexed as Annexure 16 to the petition). Thereafter, the petitioner was served with the impugned order dated 30.05.2020 passed by respondent no. 3-District Magistrate, Hamirpur, by which, his lease was cancelled.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the lease of the petitioner was cancelled by the District Magistrate, Hamirpur vide order dated 30.05.2020 for non-payment of the royalty for the period, in which, the mining activity of the petitioner was disrupted on account of the factors beyond the control of the petitioner. Thereafter, the area in question was treated as vacant and advertisement was issued on 02.06.2020 for tender-cum-auction. Aggrieved by the order dated 30.05.2020 and the advertisement dated 02.06.2020, petitioner filed revision along with the interim relief application before the Secretary in the month of July, 2020, which was registered as Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 with the following main prayers:
"i. Set aside/quash the order dated 30.05.2020 passed by the respondent no. 2, as contained in annexure no. 18 of the revision.
II. Set aside the advertisement dated 02.06.2020, for the area mentioned at Sl. No. 6 of the impugned advertisement, passed by the respondent no. 2, as contained in Annexure No. 19 to the revision."
7. The said revision was heard and admitted vide order dated 03.09.2020. An office memo was sent to the District Magistrate, Hamirpur with the requisition that on 18th November, 2020, comments/report may be placed in Room Nos. 616, 617, C-Block, 6th Floor, Lok Bhawan at 4 p.m. at the time of hearing on the aforesaid revision. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the identical cases, vide order dated 24.06.2020, protection was given by a Division Bench of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 10023 of 2020, M/s. New Praveera Infrahigh Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (Copy of the dated 24.06.2020 is annexed at page 206 of the petition). It has been submitted that interim relief application filed by the petitioner in his revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 was pending, but since the same was not being heard, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 20321 of 2020 (M/S Awasthi Traders, Banda Thru. Prop. Sh. Susheel Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) before this Court with the prayer that revision may be decided within a stipulated period. The aforesaid petition was disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2020 with the direction to the Authority to consider and decide the application for interim relief on the next date fixed, i.e., 18.11.2020, with the further direction that if it is not decided on the said date, decide the same within a period of six weeks and also decide the revision itself in accordance with law within the said period. (Copy of the order is annexed as Annexure No. 27.) Copy of the order was served on the revisional authority with the request that the application of interim relief may be heard, but since the revisional authority was not available on 18th November, 2020, hence, the matter was posted for 20.11.2020. On the said date also, the District Magistrate failed to file the comments/reply, hence, once again opportunity was granted to him to file reply. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that thereafter, no date of listing of aforesaid revision was communicated to the petitioner, however, later on, petitioner learnt that another revision is filed by some imposter in the name of the petitioner bearing Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 (M/s. Awasthi Traders Vs. District Magistrate, Hamirpur & Anr.) with the following main prayers:
"I. Call for records and quash impugned order dated 30.05.2020 passed by the District Magistrate, Hamirpur (respondent no. 1) (Annexure Nos. 1 of the revision petition).
II. Direct the respondent to allow the revisionist to carry out its mining operations and without payment of additional amount, for a time period as felt appropriate by the Revisional authority by adjusting the left over amounts.
III. Or else direct the respondent to return entire amount deposited by the petitioner, including, application fee, process fee, TCS, first instalment of lease amount, stamp duty and all other amount deposited by the petitioner for obtaining the lease, along with 18% interest in compliance of the government order dated 13/12/2018 after deduction of the utilized amounts in the excavated quantity."
8. The said revision was admitted and vide office memo No. 1047 SM/2020, Lucknow dated 3rd November, 2020, comments/reply was asked from the District Magistrate, Hamirpur and it was also expected that report be placed on 2nd December, 2020 in Room No. 616, 617, C-Block, Lok Bhawan at 4 p.m.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner requested the Revisional Authority for clubbing the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 and 133 (R)/SM/2020 to determine, as to which revision has been filed by the actual lease holder of area in question. She also submitted that District Magistrate and District Mining Officer placed the comments in the Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, without disclosing this fact that in Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 is already pending seeking the similar relief. However, the Revisional Authority, on the basis of the reply of the District Magistrate dated 18.11.2020, dismissed the Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 filed by the imposter, vide order dated 07.12.2020 with the finding that the petitioner had already filed a Writ Petition No. 11143 of 2020 before the Allahabad High Court with the same prayer and, therefore, the revision is not maintainable. It has been submitted that thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before Secretary/Director, Department of Geology and Mining, Government of U.P. requesting therein to recall the order passed in Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, as it was not filed by the petitioner (lease holder), but by some imposter. (Copy of the application is annexed as Annexure No. 28). However, in place of calling the record of Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 and the Revisional Authority vide impugned order dated 22nd January, 2021 dismissed the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 filed by the petitioner (actual lease holder) on the ground that one Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, in which, the same impugned order was challenged, had already been dismissed on 07.12.2020, therefore, Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 is not maintainable.
10. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the District Magistrate committed wrong in passing the impugned order dated 30.05.2020. Moreover, the Revisional Authority also wrongly dismissed the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 vide impugned order dated 22.01.2021 on the ground that Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 with the identical prayer had already been dismissed vide order dated 07.12.2020. It has vehemently been submitted that the Revisional Authority while passing the impugned order dated 22.01.2021 has completely ignored the fact that Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 was filed by some imposter and not by the petitioner (actual lease holder), for which, the petitioner had even moved application requesting the Revisional Authority for clubbing the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 and Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 to determine, as to which revision has been filed by the actual lease holder of the area in question. It is also submitted that the Revisional Authority while passing the impugned orders has also not considered the fact that in Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 filed by imposter, the District Magistrate and District Mining Officer had sent the objection/comments dated 18.11.2020 in compliance of the office memo dated 3rd November, 2020 issued by Secretary, Department of Mining, but he did not sent comments/objection in Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 within time in pursuance of the office memo dated 3rd September, 2020.
11. It is, thus, submitted that indulgence of this Court is necessary and the petition may be allowed and set aside the impugned orders.
12. On the other hand, learned Chief Standing Counsel opposed the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that there is no illegality in the orders passed either by the District Magistrate or the Revisional Authority. He further submitted that the dues of royalty was not deposited by the petitioner deliberately, on account of which, his lease was cancelled by the District Magistrate vide order dated 30.05.2020. He also submitted that revision was pending before the Secretary, Department of Geology and Mining, but very cleverly, the application dated 15th December, 2020 was given by the petitioner in the office of Director, Department of Geology and Mining, U.P., Lucknow with the averment that neither Writ Petition No. 11143 of 2020 at Allahabad High Court nor Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 was filed by the petitioner.
13. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner interrupted and informed that Dr. Roshan Jacob, Secretary, Department of Geology and Mining is also having the charge of Director, Directorate of Department of Geology and Mining, U.P., Lucknow since long time, therefore, it cannot be said that it was not brought into the notice of the Secretary. She also submitted that this fact was orally informed to the Secretary on 20.11.2020.
On consulting with Shri Paresh Mishra, under Secretary, Department of Geology and Mining and Amit Khaushik, Joint Director, Department of Geology and Mining, U.P., Lucknow, those were present in the Court, Shri Trivedi, Chief Standing Counsel informed that Dr. Roshan Jacob, IAS is holding the dual charge.
14. Learned Chief Standing Counsel, on the strength of counter affidavit filed by respondent nos. 1 to 4, submitted that the petitioner had filed two revisions against the order of District Magistrate, Hamirpur dated 30.05.2020 as well as notification dated 02.06.2020 bearing Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 and Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020. The petitioner also filed Writ (C) No. 11143 of 2020 (M/s. Awasthi Traders Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) before Allahabad High Court, in which, no interim order was granted. Thereafter, on the ground of filing of the aforesaid writ petition before this Court at Allahabad, Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 was dismissed by the revisional authority on 7th December, 2020, being not maintainable. Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 was also dismissed by the revisional authority on the ground of non-maintainability. It has further been submitted that against the cancellation of the lease by District Magistrate, Hamirpur vide order dated 30.05.2020, the petitioner preferred aforesaid two revisions as well as Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020, but since no interim protection was granted to him, therefore, the mining lease of the area in question was allotted in favour of some other person. Further, the petitioner failed to deposit the due amount of Rs.13,73,77,788/-, DMF amount of Rs.2,62,26,672/-, TCS amount of Rs.52,45,152/- as well as amount of Rs.51,84,000/- in lieu of the notice.
Learned Chief Standing Counsel submitted that both the revisions were filed by the petitioner, which have been decided by the revisional authority in accordance with law, after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case. It has next been submitted that the petitioner also preferred an application on 9th September, 2020 before the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur with the prayer that the order dated 30.05.2020 may be cancelled with liberty to deposit the due amount and he may be allowed for mining activity. It has, thus, been submitted that the present petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.
15. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Chief Standing Counsel as well as gone through the contents of the petition, its enclosures, counter affidavit, as also the records of Revision Nos. 106 (R)/SM/2020 and 133 (R)/SM/2020.
16. It is evident that the lease was granted to the petitioner for the area in question by executing lease deed on 06.11.2018 for the period of 27.11.2018 to 26.11.2023. Thereafter, the environmental clearance of the lease holders, including the petitioner, was the issue in question before the National Green Tribunal in O.A. Nos. 263 of 2018 and 264 of 2018 and vide order dated 25.09.2019, the environmental clearance of the lease holders was quashed by the Tribunal. Thereafter, District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur vide order dated 30.09.2019 stopped the mining activities.
The order of the Tribunal was challenged by the State of U.P. before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 8590 of 2019, which was allowed vide order dated 13.12.2019 by quashing the order dated 25.09.2019 passed by the Tribunal as well as all consequential orders, and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh decision. Again, the Tribunal passed an order on 17.12.2019 directing the parties to maintain status quo treating the earlier order dated 25.09.2019 as an interim order. The subsequent order of the Tribunal dated 17.12.2019 was again challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court by the State Government by filing Civil Appeal No. 54-55 of 2020, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 13th January, 2020 stayed the operation of the said order dated 17.12.2019 passed by the Tribunal. Thereafter, vide order dated 23rd January, 2020, the proceedings of O.A. No. 263 of 2018 and 264 of 2018 pending before the Tribunal were also stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, till the lease holders were not made parties. On 23rd January, 2020, the Tribunal passed the order allowing the impleadment of lease holders. The matter was sub-judice. In the meantime, due to Pandemic Covid-19, complete lockdown was declared on 24.03.2020 in the Country.
17. On 30.05.2020, District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur cancelled the lease of petitioner. It is also evident from the record that challenging the said order dated 30.05.2020 as well as advertisement dated 02.06.2020, a Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 was filed, which was heard and admitted by the Revisional Authority on 03.09.2020. The Revisional Authority, while fixing the matter for 18th November, 2020, asked the instructions/comments from the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur. However, the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur failed to submit the comments/objections in the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 on the date fixed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 20321 of 2020 before this Court with the prayer that his revision may be decided within a stipulated period. The aforesaid petition was disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2020 (Annexure 27 to the petition) with the direction to revisional authority to consider and decide the application for interim relief on the next date fixed with the further direction that if it is not decided on the said date, decide the same within a period of six weeks, and also decide the revision in accordance with law within the said period. Relevant part of the order dated 11.11.2020 passed by this Court in Misc. Single No. 20321 of 2020 is being reproduced as under:
"Heard Ms. Pushpila Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner restricted her prayer for a direction to consider the application for interim relief on the date fixed i.e. 18.11.2020 or to decide the revision within shortest stipulated period.
Learned Additional Chief Standing counsel has no objection to the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
In view of above,without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the opposite party no.1 to consider and decide the application for interim relief on the next date fixed i.e. 18.11.2020, if possible and if not within a period of six weeks thereafter or consider and decide the revision of the petitioner bearing No.106(R)SM/2020 in accordance with law within the aforesaid period."
18. Further, the record of Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 reveals that aforesaid order was placed before the Revisional Authority through application dated 18.11.2020. Another application dated 7th January, 2021 was also sent through registered post, which is also on the record of Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 along with the envelop, The endorsement of the Revisional Authority is also there on the said application dated 07.01.2021, which is marked to APS. However, the objection/comments of the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur was not made available in the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 upto 07.01.2021.
19. The record of Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, which is also available before this Court, reveals that it has also been filed in the name of the petitioner with the same prayer. The record of Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 further reveals that vide order dated 01.10.2020, the Revisional Authority asked the comments from the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur and expected that report be placed on 2nd December, 2020. From the record of Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, it is also evident that it is an undated revision. The record further reveals that the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur submitted the comments in this revision vide letter No. 1713-Khanij-MMC/Tees-Vividha (2020-21) dated 01.12.2020. In the comments sent by the District Magistrate in the aforesaid Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, the fact that one revision is already pending against the same order, has not been disclosed. The comment submitted by the District Magistrate, Hamirpur, which is duly signed on 28.11.2020 and dispatched vide letter dated 01.12.2020, is as under:
"isz"kd] ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqjA lsok esa] lfpo] m0iz0 'kklu] HkwrRo ,ao [kfudeZ vuqHkkx] y[kuÅA la[;k&1713@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k ¼2020&21½ fnukad &01-12-2020 fo"k; &iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk la[;k&133¼vkj½@,l,e@2020 es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ }kjk izks0 Jh lq'khy pUnz cuke ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqj ds lEcU/k esaA egksn;] d`i;k mi;qZDr fo"k;d dk;kZy; Kki la[;k&1047@,l,e0@2020 y[kuÅ fnukad&03-11-2020 ftlds }kjk fo"k;xr iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk esa lquokbZ gsrq fnukad&02-12-2020 dh frfFk fu;r gksus RkFkk fu;r frfFk ls iwoZ vk[;k miyC/k djk;s tkus dh vis{kk dh x;h gS] dk lUnHkZ xzg.k djus dk d"V djsaA iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk ds lEcU/k esa rF;kRed vk[;k bl i= ds lkFk layXu dj iszf"kr dh tk jgh gSA layXud& ;FkksifjA Hkonh;] g0 viBuh;
28-11-2020 Kkus'oj f=ikBh ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqjA iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk la[;k&133¼vkj½@,l,e@2020 es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ izks0 lq'khy pUnzk cuke ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqj ds lEcU/k esa vk[;kA 'kklukns'k la[;k &1875@86&2017&57¼lk½@2017 Vh0lh0&1 fnukad& 14-08-2017 esa fn;s x;s funsZ'kkuqlkj tuin gehjiqj ds ckyw@ekSje ds fjDr [kuu {ks=ksa dks bZ&fufonk lg bZ&uhykeh ds ek/;e ls [kuu ifjgkj ij Lohd`r djus gsrq dk;kZy; ds foKfIr fnukad&09-05-2018 }kjk foKfIr izdkf'kr djk;h x;h Fkh] ftlesa iz'uxr {ks= xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 Hkh lfEEkfyr FkkA foKfIr vUrxZr mPpre fcM nj :0&857@&izfr ?kueh0 ds vk/kkj ij es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ izks0 lq'khy pUnz iq= Jh tksxs'oj voLFkh fuoklh xzke fxjoka Fkkuk fxjoka tuin ckank m0iz0 ds i{k esa xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 jdck&12-145 gs0 dk [kuu iV~Vk 05 o"kZ dh vof/k fnukad&27-11-2018 ls 26-11-2023 rd ds fy, Lohd`r@fu"ikfnr fd;k x;k FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd ds Åij fd'r ds en esa :0&17]90]07]420@&Mh0,e0,Q0 ds en esa :0&2]62]26]672@& o Vh0lh0,l0 ds en esa :0&52]45]152@& o unh dh ty/kkjk esa voS/k [kuu ls lEcfU/kr uksfVl ds en esa :0&51]48]000@& cdk;k FkkA cdk;k /kujkf'k tek djus ds lEcU/k esa dk;kZy; ds i= la[;k&290@[kfut&,e0,e0lh&rhl&fofo/k¼2019&2020½ fnukad&28-05-2019 }kjk uksfVl fuxZr fd;k x;k FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk fnukad&30-05-2019 dks izR;kosnu izLrqr dj uksfVl fnukad&28-05-2019 dks fu{ksfir djus dk vuqjks/k fd;k x;k FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd dk izR;kosnu lUrks"ktu ugh Fkk] D;ksafd [kku vf/kdkjh] gehjiqj dh tkap vk[;k fnukad&25-05-2019 esa ;g Li"V :i ls mYYks[k fd;k x;k gS fd iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk unh dh ty/kkjk esa voS/k [kuu fd;k tk jgk FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk unh dh ty/kkjk esa fd;s x;s voS/k [kuu dh /kujkf'k :0&51]84]000@& dh olwyh gsrq uksfVl fuxZr fd;k x;k FkkA cdk;k fd'r] Mh0,e0,Q0 o Vh0lh0,l0 dh /kujkf'k tek fd;s tkus ds lEcU/k esa dksbZ mRRkj ugha fn;k x;k vkSj u gh cdk;k /kujkf'k tek dh tk jgh FkhA m0iz0 mi[kfut¼ifjgkj½¼47oka la'kks/ku½ fu;ekoyh&2019 ds fu;e&58 esa LokfeRo HkkVd ;k vU; ns;ksa ds Hkqxrku u djus ds ifj.kke ds lEcU/k esa izkfo/kku fd;k x;k gS fd ¼1½**jkT; ljdkj ;k mlds }kjk bl fufeRRk izkf/kd`r dksbZ vf/kdkjh] iV~Vsnkj ij bl ckr dh lwpuk rkehy djus ds i'pkr~ fd og lwpuk izkIr gksus ds fnukad ls rhl fnu ds Hkhrj jkT; ljdkj dks ns; LokfeRo ¼jk;YVh½ lfgr iV~Vs ds v/khu ns; dksbZ /kujkf'k ;k vifjgk;Z HkkVd dk Hkqxrku djsa] ;fn ml Hkqxrku ds fy;s fuf'pr fnukad ls iUnzg fnu ds Hkhrj mldk Hkqxrku u fd;k x;k gks] rks [kuu iV~~Vk lekIr dj ldrk gSA ;g vf/kdkj iV~Vsnkj ls ,sls ns;ksa dks Hkw&jkTkLo ds cdk;k ds :i esa olwyh djus ds jkT; ljdkj ds vf/kdkj ds vfrfjfDr gksxk vkSj ml ij dksbZ izfrdwy izHkko ugha iM+sxkA** [kuu iV~Vk foys[k ds Hkkx&3 lkekU; micU/k ds fcUnq&1 esa izkfo/kku gS fd ;fn iV~Vsnkj m0iz0 mi[kfut ¼ifjgkj½ fu;ekoyh&1963 ds fdlh fu;e ;k bl iV~Vs dh izlafonk rFkk fdlh 'krZ dks Hkax djs rks jkT; ljdkj iV~Vk lekIr dj ldrh gS o izfrHkwfr tek dks iw.kZr% ;k va'kRk% tCr dj ldrh gS ijUrq izfrcU/k ;g gS fd iV~Vk lekIr fd;s tkus ds iwoZ iV~Vsnkj dks mUgsa Hkax djus dk Li"Vhdj.k nsus ds fy;s ;Fkksfpr volj fn;k tk;sxkA mDr ds vuqlkj iV~Vk/kkjd dks ns; /kujkf'k tek djus gsrq uksfVl tkjh fd;k x;k Fkk] ftlds dze esa u gh cdk;k /kujkf'k tek dh x;h vkSj u gh uksfVl dk lUrks"ktud mRRkj izLrqr fd;k x;kA iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk izfrHkwfr ds :i esa 25 izfr'kr :0 4]16]29]632@& dk lek;kstu djus rFkk lek;kstu mijkUr cdk;k /kujkf'k fd'r :0& 13]73]77]788@& ,oa Mh0,e0,Q0 ds en esa :0& 2]62]26]672@& ,oa Vh0lh0,l0 ds en esa :0&52]45]152@& ,oa uksfVl ds en esa :0&51]84]000@& dks tek djus ds funsZ'k nsrs gq;s dk;kZy; vkns'k la[;k&240@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k ¼2020&21½ fnukad&30-05-2020 }kjk [kuu iV~Vk fujLr dj fn;k x;kA HkwrRo ,oa [kfudeZ vuqHkkx] m0iz0 'kklu] y[kuÅ }kjk tkjh 'kklukns'k la[;k&781@86&2020&14¼lk0½@2020 fnukad&23-05-2020 ,oa eq[; lfpo] m0iz0 'kklu] y[kuÅ }kjk tkjh 'kkluns'k la[;k&782@86&2020&14¼lk0½@2020 fnukad&26-05-2020 esa unh ry fLFkr mi[kfutksa ds fuf"dz; [kuu iV~Vksa dks fujLr dj] mRiUu fjDr {ks=ksa dks vYidkyhu O;oLFkk ds vUrxZr vuqKk i= ij vf/kdre N% ekg dh vof/k gsrq bZ&fufonk ds ek/;e ls Lohd`r fd;s tkus ds funsZ'k fn;s x;s gSA mDr ds dze esa foKfIr la[;k&270@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k¼2020&21½ fnukad 02-06-2020 tkjh dh x;h Fkh] ftlesa ckyw@ekSje [kuu {ks= xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 Hkh 'kkfey FkkA mijksDr foKfIr esa Jh jk?kosUnz flag vkRet es?kjkt flag 'ks[kor fuoklh& lh mfeZYkk ekxZ guqeku uxj tuin t;iqj jktLFkku }kjk tuin gehjiqj rglhy ekSngk xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 jdck&30 ,dM+ ek=k&97152 ?kueh0 ds [kuu iV~Vk gsrq :0&567@&izfr ?kueh0 dh nj izLrqr dh x;h] tks lkoZf/kd FkhA fufonk esa mPpre nj gksus ds dkj.k dk;kZy; ds i= la[;k&432@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k ¼2020&21½ fnukad&19-06-2020 }kjk ysVj vkQ bUVsaV ¼LOI) fuxZr fd;k x;k gSA izLrkod }kjk ysVj vkQ bUVsaV tkjh gksus ds mijkUr [kuu vuqKk dh ns; 50 izfr'kr /kujkf'k :0&2]75]42]592@& tek fd;k tk pqdk gS rFkk [kuu {ks= ds fy;s fuxZr i;kZoj.kh; vukifRRk izek.k i= Jh jk?kosUnz flag ds uke ls gLrkarfjr gks pqdk gS] ftldh Nk;kizfr layXu gSA d`i;k vk[;k vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq izsf"krA g0 viBuh; g0 viBuh; g0 viBuh;
¼ds0ds0jk;½ ¼fou; izdk'k JhokLro½ ¼Kkus'oj f=ikBh½ [kku vf/kdkjh vij ftykf/kdkjh ¼fOk0@jk0½ ftykf/kdkjh gehjiqj gehjiqj gehjiqj"
20. Vide order dated 07.12.2020, the Revisional Authority dismissed the Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 as not maintainable with the observation that the revisionist had already filed a writ petition being Writ (C) No. 11143 of 2020 against the order dated 30.05.2020, which was pending before the High Court and the area in question was also not vacant.
It is very surprising that in the instructions/comments of District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur, it is nowhere mentioned that Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 (M/s. Awasthi Traders Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) was filed on 26.06.2020 by the petitioner challenging the cancellation of lease order and no interim order has been passed therein. It is also evident from the pleading of the petition mentioned in paragraph 44 that on learning about the order dated 7th December, 2020 passed by the Revisional Authority in Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 filed one alleged imposter of the petitioner, moved an application before the Revisional Authority with the request to recall the order passed in Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020. By the said application, the petitioner also informed that the said Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 was not filed by the petitioner and also requested to decide the same along with Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020. In the aforesaid application, it is also mentioned that petitioner has not filed any petition being Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 in the Allahabad High Court and he had actually filed Misc. Single No. 20321 of 2020 before the Lucknow Bench of the High Court. It is also evident from the said application that it was received on 15.12.2020 in the dispatch and receipt Section of Director, Mining and Geology, Lucknow. The contents of the aforesaid application is being reproduced as under:
"lsok esa] lfpo@funs'kd] HkwrRo ,oa [kfudeZ] m0iz0] y[kuÅ egksn;] fuosnu gS fd vkids i=kad la[;k 1080@¼1½@,l,e@2020 rn~fnukad ds lanHkZ esa crkuk gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk iqujh{k.k la[;k 133@¼vkj½,l,e@2020 nkf[ky ugha dh xbZ cfYd fdlh "kM~;a=dkjh }kjk izkFkhZ dk vfgr pkgrs gq, nkf[ky dh x;h gS tks izkFkhZ ds laKku esa ugha gSA lkFk&lkFk ;g Hkh crkuk gS fd fjV ;kfpdk la[;k 11143@2020 Hkh izkFkhZ }kjk nk;j ugha dh x;hA crkuk gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk nk;j iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk la[;k 106@vkj@,l,e@2020 nk;j dh x;h gSA ftldh vk[;k vHkh rd vkids dk;kZy; dks ugh miyC/k djk;h x;h gSA izkFkhZ }kjk nk;j fjV ;kfpdk la[;k 20321@2020 tks y[kuÅ csap esa nk;j dh xbZ gS ftldh Nk;kizfr layXu gSA izkFkhZ }kjk mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn esa dksbZ Hkh ;kfpdk nk;j ugha dh x;h gSA tks Hkh ;kfpdk nk;j dh x;h gS og y[kuÅ csap esa gh izkFkhZ }kjk nk;j dh x;h gS ftldh fjV la[;k mijksDr gSA mijksDr ds lEcU/k esa egksn;k ls fuosnu gS fd mijksDr vkns'k la[;k 1080@¼1½,l,e@2020 dks RkRdky izHkko ls fujLr@fjdky djrs gq, 106@vkj@,l,e@2020 ,oa 133@¼vkj0½@,l,e@2020 dks ,d djrs gq, lquokbZ dh rkjh[k fu;r djrs gq, [kfut vf/kdkjh gehjiqj ls vk[;k eaxkus dh d`ik djsaA vfr d`ik gksxhA layXud& 1- Nk;kizfr mPp U;k;ky; ;kfpdk la[;k 20321@2020 2- Nk;kizfr vkns'k la[;k 1080@¼1½,l,e@2020 izkFkhZ eSllZ&voLFkh VsªMlZ g0&lq'khypUnz lq'khy pUnz ¼izksizkbVj½ es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ fxjokW] ckWnk"
21. Admittedly, contents of paragraph 44 of the petition have not been denied in the counter affidavit. It is also relevant to take into consideration the fact that in the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020, the comments were sought from the District Magistrate by the Revisional Authority vide office memo dated 03.09.2020 while fixing the matter for 18th November, 2020, but the comments were not placed by the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur within time. However, later on, vide letter No. 2300/Khanij-MMC-Tees-Vividh (2020-21) dated 16th January, 2021, which was signed on 14th January, 2021, the comments/objections were submitted in Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020. Surprisingly, in the comments sent by the letter dated 16.01.2021, this fact does not find place that another Revision bearing No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 filed against the same order, had already been dismissed by the Revisional Authority on 07.12.2020. However, the Revisional Authority dismissed the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 vide order dated 22nd January, 2021 with the observation that order of cancellation of lease for the same area of mining, Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 had already decided on 07.12.2020 and, therefore, subsequent revision is not maintainable.
Comments sent in Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 are as under :
"isz"kd] ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqjA lsok esa] lfpo] m0iz0 'kklu] HkwrRo ,ao [kfudeZ vuqHkkx] y[kuÅA la[;k&2300@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k ¼2020&21½ fnukad & 16-01-2021 fo"k; & iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk la[;k&106¼vkj½@,l,e@2020 es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ }kjk izks0 Jh lq'khy pUnz cuke ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqj ds lEcU/k esaA egksn;] d`i;k mi;qZDr fo"k;d dk;kZy; Kki la[;k&969@,l,e@2020 y[kuÅ fnukad&03-09-2020 ftlds }kjk fo"k;xr iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk esa lquokbZ gsrq fu;r frfFk ls iwoZ vk[;k miyC/k djk;s tkus dh vis{kk dh x;h gS] dk lUnHkZ xzg.k djus dk d"V djsaA iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk ds lEcU/k esa rF;kRed vk[;k bl i= ds lkFk layXu dj iszf"kr dh tk jgh gSA layXud& ;FkksifjA Hkonh;] g0 viBuh;
14-1-------
Kkus'oj f=ikBh o/c ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqjA iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk la[;k&106¼vkj½@,l,e@2020 es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ izks0 lq'khy pUnzk cuke ftykf/kdkjh] gehjiqj ds lEcU/k esa vk[;kA 'kklukns'k la[;k &1875@86&2017&57¼lk½@2017 Vh0lh0&1 fnukad& 14-08-2017 esa fn;s x;s funsZ'kkuqlkj tuin gehjiqj ds ckyw@ekSje ds fjDr [kuu {ks=ksa dks bZ&fufonk lg bZ&uhykeh ds ek/;e ls [kuu ifjgkj ij Lohd`r djus gsrq dk;kZy; ds foKfIr fnukad&09-05-2018 }kjk foKfIr izdkf'kr djk;h x;h Fkh] ftlesa iz'uxr {ks= xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 Hkh lfEEkfyr FkkA foKfIr vUrxZr mPpre fcM nj :0&857@&izfr ?kueh0 ds vk/kkj ij es0 voLFkh VsªMlZ izks0 lq'khy pUnz iq= Jh tksxs'oj voLFkh fuoklh xzke fxjoka Fkkuk fxjoka tuin ckank m0iz0 ds i{k esa xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 jdck&12-145 gs0 dk [kuu iV~Vk 05 o"kZ dh vof/k fnukad&27-11-2018 ls 26-11-2023 rd ds fy, Lohd`r@fu"ikfnr fd;k x;k FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk iV~Vk foys[k dh 'krksZa ds vuqlkj ns; /kujkf'k ¼fd'r] Mh0,e0,Q0 ,oa Vh0lh0,l0½ tek ugha fd;k tk jgk FkkA blds vfrfjDr unh dh ty/kkjk esa voS/k [kuu ls lEcfU/kr :0&51]48]000@& dh 'kkfLr vkjksfir dh x;h Fkh] ftls iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk ugh tek fd;k tk jgk FkkA bl lEcU/k esa dk;kZy; ds i= la[;k&290@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofof/k ¼2019&2020½ fnukad&28-05-2019 }kjk uksfVl fuxZr djrs gq;s fd'r ds en esa cdk;k /kujkf'k :0&17]90]07]420&@] Mh0,e0,Q0 ds en esa cdk;k /kujkf'k :0&2]62]26]672@& o Vh0lh0,l0 ds en esa cdk;k /kujkf'k :0&52]45]152@& o unh dh ty/kkjk esa voS/k [kuu ls lEcfU/kr 'kkfLr dh /kujkf'k :0&51]48]000@& tek djus gsrq lwfpr fd;k x;k FkkA dk;kZy; }kjk iszf"kr uksfVl ds lEcU/k esa iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk fnukad&30-05-2019 dks izR;kosnu izLrqr dj uksfVl fnukad&28-05-2019 dks fu{ksfir djus dk vuqjks/k fd;k x;k FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd dk izR;kosnu lUrks"ktud ugh Fkk D;ksafd [kku vf/kdkjh] gehjiqj dh tkap vk[;k fnukad&25-05-2019 esa Li"V :i ls mYys[k fd;k x;k gS fd iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk unh dh ty/kkjk esa voS/k [kuu fd;k tk jgk FkkA iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk unh dh ty/kkjk esa fd;s x;s voS/k [kuu dh /kujkf'k :0&51]84]000@& dh olwy gsrq uksfVl fuxZr fd;k x;k FkkA cdk;k fd'r] Mh0,e0,Q0 o Vh0lh0,l0 dh /kujkf'k tek fd;s tkus ds lEcU/k esa dksbZ mRRkj ugh fn;k x;k vkSj u gh cdk;k /kujkf'k tek dh tk jgh FkhA m0iz0 mi[kfut¼ifjgkj½¼47oka la'kks/ku½ fu;ekoyh&2019 ds fu;e&58 esa LokfeRo HkkVd ;k vU; ns;ksa ds Hkqxrku u djus ds ifj.kke ds lEcU/k esa izkfo/kku fd;k x;k gS fd ¼1½**jkT; ljdkj ;k mlds }kjk bl fufeRRk izkf/kd`r dksbZ vf/kdkjh] iV~Vsnkj ij bl ckr dh lwpuk rkehy djus ds i'pkr~ fd og lwpuk izkIr gksus ds fnukad ls rhl fnu ds Hkhrj jkT; ljdkj dks ns; LokfeRo ¼jk;YVh½ lfgr iV~Vs ds v/khu ns; dksbZ /kujkf'k ;k vifjgk;Z HkkVd dk Hkqxrku djsa] ;fn ml Hkqxrku ds fy;s fuf'pr fnukad ls iUnzg fnu ds Hkhrj mldk Hkqxrku u fd;k x;k gks] rks [kuu iV~~Vk lekIr dj ldrk gSA ;g vf/kdkj iV~Vsnkj ls ,sls ns;ksa dks Hkw&jkTkLo ds cdk;k ds :i esa olwyh djus ds jkT; ljdkj ds vf/kdkj ds vfrfjfDr gksxk vkSj ml ij dksbZ izfrdwy izHkko ugha iM+sxkA** [kuu iV~Vk foys[k ds Hkkx&3 lkekU; micU/k ds fcUnq&1 esa izkfo/kku gS fd ;fn iV~Vsnkj m0iz0 mi[kfut ¼ifjgkj½ fu;ekoyh&1963 ds fdlh fu;e ;k bl iV~Vs dh izlafonk rFkk fdlh 'krZ dks Hkax djs rks jkT; ljdkj iV~Vk lekIr dj ldrh gS o izfrHkwfr tek dks iw.kZr% ;k va'kRk% tCr dj ldrh gS ijUrq izfrcU/k ;g gS fd iV~Vk lekIr fd;s tkus ds iwoZ iV~Vsnkj dks mUgsa Hkax djus dk Li"Vhdj.k nsus ds fy;s ;Fkksfpr volj fn;k tk;sxkA mDr ds vuqlkj iV~Vk/kkjd dks ns; /kujkf'k tek djus gsrq uksfVl tkjh fd;k x;k Fkk] ftlds dze esa u gh cdk;k /kujkf'k tek dh x;h vkSj u gh uksfVl dk lUrks"ktud mRRkj izLrqr fd;k x;kA iV~Vk/kkjd }kjk [kuu iV~Vs ds vUrxZr ns; /kujkf'k uksfVl fn;s tkus ds mijkUr Hkh tek u fd;s tkus ds dkj.k dk;kZy; vkns'k la[;k&240@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k¼2020&21½fnukad&30-05-2020 ds }kjk [kuu iV~Vk fujLr djrs gq;s fd'r ds en esa cdk;k /kujkf'k esa ls izfrHkwfr ds :i esa tek /kujkf'k :0&4]16]29]632@& dks lek;ksftr djrs gq;s cdk;k /kujkf'k :0&13]73]77]788@&] Mh0,e0,Q0 ds en esa cdk;k /kujkf'k :0&2]62]26]672@&] Vh0lh0,l0 ds en esa cdk;k /kujkf'k :0&52]45]152@& ,oa unh dh ty/kkjk esa voS/k [kuu ds dkj.k vkjksfir 'kkfLr dh /kujkf'k :0&51]84]000@& tek djus ds funsZ'k fn;s x;sA HkwrRo ,oa [kfudeZ vuqHkkx] m0iz0 'kklu] y[kuÅ }kjk tkjh 'kklukns'k la[;k&781@86&2020&14¼lk0½@2020 fnukad&23-05-2020 ,oa eq[; lfpo] m0iz0 'kklu] y[kuÅ }kjk tkjh 'kklukns'k la[;k&782@86&2020&14¼lk0½@2020 fnukad&26-05-2020 esa unh ry fLFkr mi[kfutksa ds fuf"dz; [kuu iV~Vksa dks fujLr dj] mRiUu fjDr {ks=ksa dks vYidkyhu O;oLFkk ds vUrxZr vuqKk i= ij vf/kdre N% ekg dh vof/k gsrq bZ&fufonk ds ek/;e ls Lohd`r fd;s tkus ds funsZ'k fn;s x;s gSA mDr ds dze esa foKfIr la[;k&270@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k¼2020&21½ fnukad 02-06-2020 tkjh dh x;h Fkh] ftlesa ckyw@ekSje [kuu {ks= xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 Hkh 'kkfey FkkA mijksDr foKfIr esa Jh jk?kosUnz flag vkRet es?kjkt flag 'ks[kor fuoklh& lh mfeZYkk ekxZ guqeku uxj tuin t;iqj jktLFkku }kjk tuin gehjiqj rglhy ekSngk xzke cDNk[kknj [k.M la[;k&29@1 jdck&30 ,dM+ ek=k&97152 ?kueh0 ds [kuu iV~Vk gsrq :0&567@&izfr ?kueh0 dh nj izLrqr dh x;h] tks lkoZf/kd FkhA fufonk esa mPpre nj gksus ds dkj.k dk;kZy; ds i= la[;k&432@[kfut&,e0,e0lh0&rhl&fofo/k ¼2020&21½ fnukad&19-06-2020 }kjk ysVj vkQ bUVsaV ¼LOI) fuxZr fd;k x;k gSA izLrkod }kjk ysVj vkQ bUVsaV tkjh gksus ds mijkUr [kuu vuqKk dh ns; 50 izfr'kr /kujkf'k :0&2]75]42]592@& tek fd;k tk pqdk gS rFkk [kuu {ks= ds fy;s fuxZr i;kZoj.kh; vukifRRk izek.k i= Jh jk?kosUnz flag ds uke ls gLrkarfjr gks pqdk gSA leLr vkSipkfjdrkvksa dks iw.kZ djus ds mijkUr Jh jk?kosUnz flag ds i{k esa iz'uxr {ks= ds fy;s 06 ekg dk [kuu vuqKk i= fnukad&04-01-2021 dks fuxZr fd;k tk pqdk gS] ftuds }kjk mDr {ks= esa [kuu dk;Z fd;k tk jgk gSA d`i;k vk[;k vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq izsf"krA g0 viBuh; g0 viBuh; g0 viBuh;
¼ds0ds0jk;½ ¼fou; izdk'k JhokLro½ ¼Kkus'oj f=ikBh½ [kku vf/kdkjh vij ftykf/kdkjh fOk0@jk0 ftykf/kdkjh gehjiqj gehjiqj gehjiqj"
22. It is staggering that the Revisional Authority, who is admittedly having dual charge as Secretary as well as Director of Geology and Mining, while dismissing the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 vide order dated 22nd January, 2021, had not considered the application of petitioner, in regard to the fact that neither any Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 had been filed by the petitioner at Allahabad High Court nor Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 was filed by him. Admittedly, the said application was received in the office of Director, Geology and Mining on 15.12.2020.
23. It is also noteworthy that records of Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 and Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 reveal that neither any order sheet has been maintained by the Revisional Authority nor attendance of the pairokars of the parties has been noted.
The power of revision is provided in the Statute and, therefore, it is the bounded duty of the Revisional Authority to maintain the order sheet as well as the status of the revision was to be uploaded on the portal of the department's website.
24. Considering the overall facts of the issue in question, it is hammering to the Court that once this fact has been brought into the notice of the Revisional Authority that revisionist-petitioner had not filed any writ petition before the High Court at Allahabad bearing Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 nor filed any Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, the Revisional Authority,/Director, Mining and Geology, U.P., without taking cognizance on the application of the petitioner, received to it on 15.12.2020, vide impugned order dated 22.01.2021 dismissed the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 on the extraneous facts, that one Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 is already dismissed against the same order, which is not mentioned in the instructions/objection of the District Magistrate/District Officer, Hamirpur dated 16th January, 2021.
25. From the record, it is evident that it is the admitted case of the petitioner that Writ Petition No. 20321 of 2020 was filed by him, with the prayer for expediting the disposal of Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2020 with the direction to decide the interim relief application on the next date fixed, i.e., on 18th November, 2020, if not possible, decide the same within a period of six weeks. Vide order dated 11.11.2020, this Court also directed to decide the revision of the petitioner in accordance with law. Admittedly, the order dated 11.11.2020 was not complied with and Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 was dismissed by the Revisional Authority, as not maintainable on the ground that Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020, challenging the same order had already been decided.
26. Further, it is evident that Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 was dismissed on the ground of filing of Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 before this Court at Allahabad, but the petitioner categorically denied for filing of any such petition.
27. In view of above facts and discussions, the impugned order dated 22.01.2021 passed in Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 as well as order dated 07.12.2020 passed in Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 are hereby set aside with the direction to the Principal Secretary, Geology and Mining to decide the Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 after giving the opportunity of hearing to the parties by a reasoned and speaking order, within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
28. The writ petition stands allowed.
29. However, before the parting with the judgment, it is noteworthy here that the present issue evolves a case of filing of a writ petition before this Court as well as revisional Authority, by some alleged imposter, which is serious in nature and, therefore, the Director, CBI is hereby directed to register an F.I.R. treating the application of the petitioner as a complaint (annexed as Annexure No. 28 to the petition) and investigate the issue relating to filing of Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 at Allahabad High Court as well as Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020.
Further, looking to the fact that the present dispute is an outcome of filing of multiple cases against same order, even by imposter also, in order to harass such practice, the State Government is directed to commence a mechanism, which allows the concerned parties to file their revisions/cases through E-mode also and also ensure that every order, including the final orders of each case should strictly be uploaded on the website of the concerned Department.
30. Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the Chief Secretary, State of U.P. and Legal Remembrancer of U.P. for necessary compliance. The copy of this order be also communicated to the Principal Secretary, Geology and Mining for examining the action of concerned persons. A copy of this order be also communicated to the Director, C.B.I. for registering a case and investigation in the matter, who shall submit police report expeditiously and also file compliance report by 05.12.20222 before the Senior Registrar of this Court.
Senior Registrar of this Court is also directed to transmit the photocopies of the complete record of this petition as well as Writ Petition (C) No. 11143 of 2020 (filed at Allahabad High Court), as also records of Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 and Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 along with a copy of this order to the Director, C.B.I. Office is also directed that the photostat copies of complete records of Revision No. 133 (R)/SM/2020 and Revision No. 106 (R)/SM/2020 be kept in the record of this case.
June 10, 2022 VKS