Jharkhand High Court

M/S. Shiv Kumar Prasad vs State Of Jharkhand on 25 September, 2025

Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad

                                 2025:JHHC:30369-DB




  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           ------

W.P. (C) No. 4503 of 2025

M/s. Shiv Kumar Prasad, having its registered office at Abadganj, Daltonganj, P.O & P.S- Daltonganj, District- Palamu, PIN-822101, (Jharkhand), through its Proprietor Shiv Kumar Prasad, aged about 63 years, Son of Saryu Saw, resident of Abadganj Ward no-22 near Bhudhan Office, Daltonganj, P.O & P.S- Daltonganj, Palamu, Jharkhand, PIN 822101. ... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Palamu, having its office at District Collectorate, Palamu, P.O. and P.S. Palamu, District Palamu (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Palamu, having its office at District Collectorate, Palamu, P.O. and P.S. Palamu, District Palamu (Jharkhand).

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

... Respondents with

HETAMSARIA PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD., a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013, having its office at Mahabir Tower, Opposite-GEL Church Complex, Main Road, P.O-G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001, through its Director Pratik Hetamsaria, aged about 38 years, son of Prakash Kumar Hetamsaria, resident of Flat-1C, Block-B, Belair Apartment, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002,

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

HETAMSARIA PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD., a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013, having its office at Mahabir Tower, Opposite-GEL Church Complex, Main Road, P.O-G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001, through its Director Pratik Hetamsaria, aged about 38 years, son of Prakash Kumar Hetamsaria, resident of Flat-IC, Block- B, Belair Apartment, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

6. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

... Respondents

with

HETAMSARIA PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD., a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013, having its office at Mahabir Tower, Opposite-GEL Church Complex, Main Road, P.O -G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001, through its Director Pratik Hetamsaria, aged about 38 years, son of Prakash Kumar Hetamsaria, resident of Flat-1C, Block-B, Belair Apartment, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.,

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

M/s JAMIR UDDIN ANSARI, a Proprietorship Firm, having its registered office at Lalganj, Shahpur, Chainpur, Palamu, Jharkhand through its Authorized Signatory Girish Kumar, aged about 51 years, son of Sri Radhey Shyam Prasad, resident of Ranchi Road Redma P.O.- Redma and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamu, PIN 822114 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of. Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.Ο. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, having its office at Collectorate Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Ranchi, having its office at Vikas Bhawan, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

M/s SHYAM STONE MINE, a Proprietorship Firm, having its registered office at Karma Kala Chattarpur, Palamu, Jharkhand, 822114, through its Authorized Signatory Girish Kumar, aged about 51 years, son of Sri Radhey Shyam Prasad, resident of Ranchi Road Redma P.O.- Redma and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamu, PIN 822114 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S.

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa, having its office at District Collectorate, Garhwa, P.O. and P.S. Garhwa, District Garhwa (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Garhwa, having its office at District Collectorate, Garhwa, P.O. and P.S. Garhwa, District Garhwa (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

M/s Bhagwati Stone Works, a Proprietorship Firm, having its registered office at Auwal Mohalla, Court Road, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District-Chatra, Jharkhand-825401, through its Proprietor Amit Kumar Sahay, aged about 44 years, son of Sri Srikant Kumar Sahay, resident of Awwul Mohalla P.O.- Chatra and P.S. Chatra, District Chatra, PIN 825401 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Deogarh, having its office at Collectorate Building, Deogarh, P.O. and P.S. Deogarh, District Deogarh (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Deogarh, having its office at Deogarh, P.O. and P.S. Deogarh, District Deogarh (Jharkhand).

... Respondents

with

SHIV KUMAR PRASAD, (A Proprietorship Concern), having its office at Abadganj, Daltonganj, P.O and P.S- Daltonganj, District-Palamu, PIN-822101, (Jharkhand) through its Proprietor Shiv Kumar Prasad, aged about 63 years, son of Saryu Saw, resident of Abadganj Ward No.-22, Near Budhan Office, PO& PS-Daltonganj, District-Palamu, PIN- 822101(Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Khunti, having its office at District Collectorate, Khunti, P.O. and P.S. Khunti, District Khunti (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Khunti, P.O. and P.S. Khunti, District Khunti (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

SHIV KUMAR PRASAD, (A Proprietorship Concern), having its office at Abadganj, Daltonganj, P.O and P.S- Daltonganj, District-Palamu, PIN-822101, (Jharkhand) through its Proprietor Shiv Kumar Prasad, aged about 63 years, son of Saryu Saw, resident of Abadganj Ward No.-22, Near Budhan Office, Daltonganj P.O and P.S. Daltonganj, Palamu, PIN- 822101(Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan

- 10 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

(Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Khunti, having its office at District Collectorate, Khunti, P.O. and P.S. Khunti, District Khunti (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Khunti, having its office at District Collectorate, Khunti, P.O. and P.S. Khunti, District Khunti (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

HETAMSARIA PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD., a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013, having its office at Mahabir Tower, Opposite-GEL Church Complex, Main Road, P.O-G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001, through its Director Pratik Hetamsaria, aged about 38 years, son of Prakash Kumar Hetamsaria, resident of Flat-IC, Block- B, Belair Apartment, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner

- 11 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Simdega, having its office at District Collectorate, Simdega, P.O. and P.S. Simdega, District Simdega (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Simdega, having its office at District Collectorate, Simdega, P.O. and P.S. Simdega, District Simdega (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

- 12 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

B, Belair Apartment, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001 (Jharkhand).

... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

HETAMSARIA PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD., a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013, having its office at Mahabir Tower, Opposite-GEL Church Complex, Main Road,

- 13 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

P.O -G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001, through its Director Pratik Hetamsaria, aged about 38 years, son of Prakash Kumar Hetamsaria, resident of Flat-1C, Block-B, Belair Apartment, Main Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi, PIN 834001 (Jharkhand) .... Petitioner Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, having its Office at Vikas Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

4. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman, having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

5. Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., having its office at Khanij Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi, PIN 834002.

6. Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

7. District Mining Officer, Lohardaga, having its office at District Collectorate, Lohardaga, P.O. and P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga (Jharkhand).

... Respondents with

- 14 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

M/s Abdussalam Ansari, a proprietorship firm having its registered office at Kalakata, PO: Patjora, PS: Raneshwar, Dumka-814148 represented by its proprietor Abdussalam Ansari, aged about 51, son of Md. Gulam Rasul resident of Village: Kalakata, PO: Patjora, P.S: Raneshwar, District- Dumka, Pin: 814148.

.... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand, represented through the Chief Secretary, 1st Floor, Project Bhawan, P.O Dhurwa, P.S:

Dhurwa, Ranchi, Jharkhand-834004

2. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited through Secretary, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, P.O & P.S:

Doranda, District: Ranchi, PIN 834002.

3. The District Mining Officer cum Officer on Special Duty Dumka, P.O & P.S: Dumka, District: Dumka.

4. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka P.O & P.S: Dumka, District: Dumka.

5. Incharge, Sand- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited Khanij Nigam Bhawan, P.O & P.S:

Doranda, District :-Ranchi, PIN- 834002 ... Respondents

-------

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advcoate Ms. Shruti Shekhar, Advocate M/s Nillohit Choubey, Shilpi Sandil, Sanya Kumari, Ranjeet Kushwaha, Hrakhar Harit, Ashutosh Agarwal, Nidhi Lall, Anish Lal,

For the Respondents : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG II Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG III

- 15 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv Mr. Shray Mishra, AC to AG Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, AC to AAG III

--------

CAV on 04/09/2025 Pronounced on 25/09/2025 Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J:

1. Since the issues involved in the instant batch of writ

petitions are identical, therefore, at the request of learned

counsel for the parties, all these matters have been tagged

together. Accordingly, they are heard together and are being

disposed of by this common order.

Prayer made in the writ petitions:

2. These writ petitions have been filed, under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, for the relief as quoted as under:

3. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4503 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 19th February, 2024 (Annexure-9), in respect of 'Kanke Khurd Sand Ghat', situated at Kanke Khurd, Block: Patan, District Palamu, having an area of 4.08 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per the terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Kanke Khurd Sand Ghat, situated at Kanke Khurd, Block: Patan, District Palamu, having an area of

- 16 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

4.08 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 19th February 2024 (Annexure-9).

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing/setting aside the Notification dated 30th September, 2022 (Annexure-11), to the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to 15th August, 2025, as opposed to being declared as Deemed Lessee of Sand Ghats for a period of five years from the date of operation of Sand Ghats, as being violative of Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017.

(iv) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 992 dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-12) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(vi) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the impugned Letter issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

4. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 3089 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025,

- 17 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexurwe-11), in respect of 'Gitilghar-Kharta Sand Ghat', situated at Block- Kairo, District Lohardaga, having an area of 4.67 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Gitilghar-Kharta Sand Ghat, situated at Block-Kairo, District Lohardaga, having an area of 4.67 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11).

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing/setting aside the Notification dated 30th September, 2022 (Annexure-14), to the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to 15th August, 2025, as opposed to being declared as Deemed Lessee of Sand Ghats for a period of five years from the date of operation of Sand Ghats, as being violative of Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017.

(iv) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 969 dated 31.07.2025(Annexure-15) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(vi) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction,

- 18 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter по. 1067 dated 01.08.2025(Annexure-16) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

5. The Prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 3162 of 2025 reads as

under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11), in respect of 'Harmu-Bhakso Sand Ghat', situated at Block-

Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 7.29 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a "MDO in respect of 'Harmu-Bhakso Sand Ghat, situated at Block Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 7.29 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11).

- 19 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017.

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 969 dated 31.07.2025(Annexure-15) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter no. 1067 dated 01.08.2025(Annexure-16) issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

6. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 3163 of 2025 reads as

under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11), in respect of 'Doba Sand Ghat', situated at Block-Kuru, District Lohardaga, having an area of 3.10 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per the terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent-

authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Doba Sand Ghat, situated at Block- Kuru, District Lohardaga, having an area of 3.10 hectares during subsistence and currency of the

- 20 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Agreement dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11).

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter 969 dated No. 31.07.2025(Annexure-15) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter no. 1067 dated Letter being 01.08.2025(Annexure-16) issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

7. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 3164 of 2025 reads as

under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexurwe-11), in respect of 'Lawagain-Nadinagra Sand Ghat', situated at

- 21 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Block-Kuru-Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 3.61 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per the terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Lawagain-Nadinagra Sand Ghat, situated at Block-Kuru-Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 3.61 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11).

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter по. 1067 dated 01.08.2025(Annexure-16) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered

- 22 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

8. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 3387 of 2025 reads as

under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 22nd January, 2024 (Annexure-11), in respect of 'Sayamnagar Sand Ghat', situated at Block-

Silli, District Ranchi, having an area of 6.50 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Sayamnagar Sand Ghat', situated at Block- Silli, District Ranchi, having an area of 6.50 hectares during subsistence and currency of the 22 hd Agreement dated 22nd January, 2024 (Annexure-11).

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing/setting aside the Notification dated 30th September, 2022 (Annexure-13), to the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to 15th August, 2025, as opposed to being declared as Deemed Lessee of Sand Ghats for a period of five years from the date of operation of Sand Ghats, as being violative of Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017.

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 972 dated 31.07.2025(Annexure-14) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development

- 23 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter no. 1105 dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure-15) issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

9. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 3884 of 2025 reads as

under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 19th January, 2024 (Annexure-11), in respect of North Koyal Sand Ghat 2', situated at Block-

Kandi, District Garhwa, having an area of 15.3 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'North Koyal Sand Ghat 2, situated at Block-Kandi, District Garhwa, having an area of 15.3 hectares' during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 19th January, 2024 (Annexure-11).

- 24 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

August, 2025, as opposed to being declared as Deemed Lessee of Sand Ghats for a period of five years from the date of operation of Sand Ghats, as being violative of Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017.

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 1024 dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-14) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter no. 1105 dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure-15) issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

10. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4504 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 9th October, 2024 (Annexure-9), in respect of 'Raniganj Sand Ghat', District Deogarh, having an area of 3.62 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per the terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent-

authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a

- 25 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

'MDO' in respect of 'Raniganj Sand Ghat, District Deogarh, having an area of 3.62 hectares' during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 9th October, 2024(Annexure-9).

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 979 dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-12) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter dated 1061 no. 01.08.2025(Annexure-13) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

11. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4514 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025,

- 26 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 19th February, 2023 (Annexure-9), in respect of 'Pandu Sand Deposit (River Bed of Banai)', District Khunti, having an area of 2.80 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Pandu Sand Deposit (River Bed of Banai), District Khunti, having an area of 2.80 hectares' during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 19th February, 2024 (Annexure-9).

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 992 dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-12) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

- 27 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

12. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4515 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 19th February, 2024 (Annexure-9), in respect of 'Sode Sand Ghat Deposit (In River bed of Koel)', District Khunti, having an area of 7.10 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent-

authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Sode Sand Ghat Deposit (In River bed of Koel), District Khunti, having an area of 7.10 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 19th February, 2024 (Annexure-9).

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 992 dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-12) issued

- 28 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the impugned Letter issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

13. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4537 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 20th August, 2024 (Annexure-10), in respect of 'Gorra', situated at Block- Bano, District-

Simdega, having an area of 5.80 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a 'MDO' in respect of 'Gorra Sand Ghat, situated at Block- Bano, District Simdega, having an area of 5.80 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 20th August, 2024 (Annexure-10).

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing/setting aside the Notification dated 30th September, 2022 (Annexure-12), to the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to 15th

- 29 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

(iv) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter No. 969 dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-13) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter no. 1067 dated 01.08.2025(Annexure-14) issued by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

14. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4543 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-10), in respect of 'Senha-Medho Sand Ghat', situated at Block-

Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 7.09 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a

- 30 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

'MDO' in respect of 'Senha-Medho Sand Ghat, situated at Block Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 7.09 hectares during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-10).

(iii) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing/setting aside the Notification dated 30th September, 2022 127 (Annexure-12), to the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to 15th August, 2025, as opposed to being declared as Deemed Lessee of Sand Ghats for a period of five years from the date of operation of Sand Ghats, as being violative of Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017.

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter being Letter no. 1067 dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure-14) issued by Respondent- Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

15. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4626 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including Writ of Declaration, declaring that in terms of

- 31 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, Petitioner's Mining Developer cum Operator (MDO) Agreement, dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexurwe-11), in respect of 'Kaimo-Bhakso Sand Ghat', situated at Block- Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 4.32 hectares, shall be deemed to be valid for a period of five years as per the terms of the Agreement.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting Respondent- authorities from restraining the Petitioner to act as a *MDO' in respect of 'Kaimo-Bhakso Sand Ghat, situated at Block-Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, having an area of 4.32 hectares' during subsistence and currency of the Agreement dated 8th May, 2025 (Annexure-11).

(v) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing the Letter 1067 по. dated Letter being 01.08.2025(Annexure-16) issued

- 32 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

by Respondent-Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited, wherein the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement entered into between the parties has been cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025."

16. The prayer as made in W.P. (C) No. 4700 of 2025 reads

as under:

(i) For a Writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing the respondent authority to allow the petitioner to continue the mining of sand in terms of the agreements dated 2nd May 2025 (Annexure -6 & 6/1) upon quashing and/or setting aside the impugned notice dated 01.08.2025 signed on 31.07.2025 vide letter no 1081 (Annexure-7) issued under the signature of the respondent no. 5 whereby and where under the LOI and agreements are directed to be cancelled w.e.f. 16th, August 2025 arbitrarily, whimsically, in utter violation of Clause-20 and more specifically Clause 20 (3) of the Gazette Notification Dated 13th. May 2025 (Annexure-

8/1).

(ii) During pendency of the instant Writ Application the

operation & implementation of the impugned letter dated

01.08.2025 (Anneure-7) may be stayed till disposal of

the Writ Petition.

Facts of the case:

17. Since similar facts and prayers have been made in these

batch of writ petitions, as such for the sake of convenience,

the brief facts of one of the cases of the batch matter, i.e., in

W.P. (C) No. 3089 of 2025, is referred as under:

- 33 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

18. The petitioner is a company registered under the

Companies Act, 2013 and Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, 6 and 7,

are State of Jharkhand and/or its officers working for gain for

the State of Jharkhand and are, thus, 'State' within the

meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

Respondent No. 4-Jharkhand State Mineral Development

Corporation Limited is a 100% subsidiary of State of

Jharkhand and is, thus, 'State' within the meaning of Article

12 of the Constitution of India and Respondent No.5 is an

officer working for gain for Respondent No.4-Corporation.

19. The Respondent-State of Jharkhand, vide Notification

dated 16th August, 2017 promulgated 'Jharkhand State Sand

Mining Policy, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as Policy of 2017)

in exercise of the power conferred under Section 15 of the

Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957

(hereinafter referred to as 'MMDR Act, 1957'). Under the said

Sand Mining Policy, 2017, sand deposits were categorized

into two categories i.e., Category-1 and Category-2. The

dispute in present writ applications relate to Category-2 Sand

Ghats.

20. As per Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017 in

respect of Category-2 Sand Ghats, sand deposits were to be

managed by State Government through Jharkhand State

Mineral Development Corporation Limited (in short 'JSMDC')

- 34 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

and JSMDC was to be allocated sand deposits for a period of

five years or more as decided by State Government and it was

the responsibility of JSMDC to obtain all statutory clearances

for sand mining, storage and sale. Under the Policy, State

Government was to reimburse entire expenditure incurred by

JSMDC for operation and maintenance of Sand Ghats and

was to pay suitable Agency commission as fixed by the

Government.

21. The Respondent-State of Jharkhand carried out

amendment under Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession

Rules, 2004, vide Notification dated 12th December, 2017 and

inserted Rule 12(4) providing, inter alia, that JSMDC shall be

Deemed Lessee in respect of such Sand Ghats which are

being operated by it or for which authorization is to given to

State Government.

22. Consequent upon Policy of 2017, Respondent-JSMDC

published a Notice Inviting Expression of Interest dated

30.09.2021 for empanelment of Mining Developer-cum-

Operator (for short 'MDO').

23. It is stated that from bare perusal of aforesaid Notice

Inviting Expression of Interest, it would be evident that

Respondent-JSMDC, acting as an agent of the State

Government, intended to empanel „MDO‟ as a facilitator

ensuring activity of sand mining, storage and sale. Further

- 35 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

from Expression of Interest, it would be evident that MDO

was primarily required to carry out following works, namely;-

(i) Obtaining statutory clearances;

(ii) Excavation of sand;

(iii) Transportation of sand from Sand Ghat to Stockyards,

(iv) Setting up and maintenance of Stockyards;

(v) Loading of sand in the vehicle and sale to end- consumers.

24. Consequent upon issuance of aforesaid Expression of

Interest, Petitioner-company applied for empanelment as

MDO, and, vide Letter No. 1808 dated 30.09.2022, petitioner

in WPC No. 3089 of 2025 was empanelled as „MDO‟ by

Respondent-JSMDC.

25. Further, the State of Jharkhand, vide Notification dated

31st March 2022, provided, inter alia, that process of

settlement of Sand Ghat in favour of MDO would be carried

out through Nodal Agencies i.e. Deputy Commissioner of each

District of Jharkhand where Sand Ghats are located, through

JSMDC.

26. Consequent upon aforesaid Resolution, invitation of

Financial Proposal from MDOs was issued by the Nodal

Officer i.e. Deputy Commissioner of each District for

settlement of Sand Ghat in favour of empanelled MDO and,

accordingly, Notice Inviting Tender dated 02.09.2024 was

issued pertaining to Sand Ghat namely, Gitilghar-Kharta,

- 36 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Block Kairo, District Lohardaga having an area of 4.67

hectares so far W.P. (C) No. 3089 of 2025 is concerned.

27. Petitioner participated in aforesaid tender and, on being

declared successful, JSMDC issued Letter of Intent vide

Letter No. 2140 dated 15.10.2024.

28. As per terms of Letter of Intent, the petitioner was

required to take steps for obtaining statutory clearances

including mining clearance, environmental clearance,

consent to establish and consent to operate clearances etc.

from the respective statutory authorities.

29. Petitioner, consequent upon issuance of Letter of Intent,

has deposited „Performance Security amount‟ and „Additional

Security amount‟ with the Respondent.

30. Thereafter, as per the terms of the Letter of Intent, the

petitioner obtained necessary clearance of sanction of Mining

Plan which was granted by Respondent-District Mining

Officer vide Memo No. 953/M, dated 26.11.2024. Thereafter,

petitioner took steps for grant of Environmental Clearance

from the competent authority i.e. State Environment Impact

Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Jharkhand, and, accordingly

Environmental Clearance dated 22.01.2025 was granted for

the Sand Ghat in question. Even „Consent to Establish‟ and

„Consent to Operate‟ orders were issued by the Jharkhand

- 37 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

State Pollution Control Board vide orders dated 19.03.2025

and 22.04.2025 respectively.

31. After obtaining such clearances, an Agreement dated 8th

May, 2025 was entered by and between JSMDC and

petitioner, whereby the petitioner was appointed as 'MDO‟, in

respect of Gitilgarh-Kharta Sand Ghat for a period of five

years as per terms of Agreement. So far other writ petitions

are concerned, similar agreement on different dates were

entered between the parties.

32. Thereafter, the State of Jharkhand has notified

"Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025" (for short 'Rules of

2025') vide Notification dated 9th May, 2025 wherein it has

been provided, inter alia, that sand deposit of Category-2

Sand Ghat shall be managed through auction by competitive

Bidding of the State Government. However, Rule 20 of Rules

of 2025 contains „Repeal and Saving‟ clause, wherein at it is

said that on the commencement of these rules, the

Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy, 2017 and its subsequent

amendments shall cease to be in force except as regards

things, done or omitted to be done before such

commencements.

33. It is the case of the petitioners since there was

widespread confusion regarding status of Petitioner as 'MDO'

in view of Rules of 2025 as such the petitioner sought for

- 38 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

clarification from Respondent-authorities but no written

clarification has been given rather petitioner's representative

has been verbally informed that after introduction of Rules of

2025, petitioner's MDO agreement would come to an end with

effect from 15th August, 2025.

34. It is further case of the petitioner that the petitioner has

been supplied with a Notification issued by Respondent-

Mines and Geology Department dated 30th September, 2022,

wherein in terms of clause 4(b) of Mining Policy of 2017,

tenure of Deemed Lessee of JSMDC has been extended up to

15th August, 2025.

35. Under the said circumstances, petitioners have been

compelled to file the present writ petitions seeking the reliefs

as quoted above.

36. However, during pendency of the instant writ

application, petitioner has been issued a letter, being Letter

No. 969 dated 31.07.2025 by which it has been informed that

due to expiry of the tenure of Jharkhand State Sand Mining

Policy, 2017 and with the implementation of Sand Mining

Rules, 2025, empanelment of Petitioner as MDO has been

cancelled with effect from 16th August, 2025 and petitioner

has been directed to take back its EMD amount after

furnishing Bank details. Further, Respondent-Jharkhand

State Mineral Development Corporation Limited issued Letter

- 39 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

no. 1067 dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure-16), wherein the Letter

of Intent issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Agreement

entered into between the parties has been cancelled with

effect from 16th August, 2025.

37. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner challenged the same by

filing Interlocutory Application(s) in respective writ petitions

which was allowed.

Submission on behalf of Petitioners:

38. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that

in pursuance to the promulgation of „Jharkhand State Sand

Mining Policy, 2017‟, the JSMDC published Notice Inviting

Expression of Interest for empanelment of Mining Developer-

cum-Operator [MDO], in which the petitioner participated

and became successful and accordingly, agreement dated 8th

May, 2025 was entered into between the parties, after

obtaining all necessary clearances and depositing the

statutory amount, as per terms and conditions of tender.

39. Submission has been made that petitioners are having

valid legal expectation to act as 'MDO' pursuant to the

Agreement entered by it with Respondent-authorities, and,

there would be breach of „Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation‟,

if petitioners are not allowed to continue with the work of

„MDO‟ on the alleged ground that JSMDC's period of Deemed

Lessee has expired on 15th August, 2025.

- 40 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

40. Further submission has been made that the

Respondent-JSMDC and/or State Government, neither at the

time of publishing „NIT‟ for empanelment as MDO, nor at the

time of issuance of „Letter of Intent‟ to the petitioner, has ever

stated that tenure of MDO would be only up to 15 th August,

2025. On the contrary, there is a clear stipulation in the „NIT‟

as well as in the „Letter of Intent‟ that MDO appointed shall

be for a period of five years. Thus, if alleged date of Deemed

Lessee of Respondent-JSMDC is treated as a general date for

all Sand Ghats, irrespective of the date of allotment of said

Sand Ghats for the purpose of its operation, submission has

been made that it is evident respondents have clearly acted

contrary to the principles of „Legitimate Expectation‟.

41. Therefore, submission has been made that it is a case

where the writ petitioners have got accrued right in

pursuance to the agreement entered into between the JSMDC

and the writ petitioners, as such even though the validity of

the lease, as has been granted in favour of JSMDC, expired

then also the right of the writ petitioners in pursuance to the

agreement will be said to be valid till the validity of the lease

agreement.

42. It is the case of the petitioners that in the Rule, 2025,

there is „Repeal and Savings‟ clause wherein specific clause

20(1) has been inserted saving the things which have already

- 41 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

been done under the Policy of 2017, and thereby the right of

the writ petitioners will be said to be saved in view of the

agreement entered in between the parties and the formalities

of getting environmental clearances etc. has also been acted

upon on their behalf but contrary to such insertion of „Repeal

and Saving‟ clause, the respondent-authorities, on the

strength of Notification dated 30th September, 2022, are

trying to cease the authority of petitioner as a MDO in respect

of the Sand Ghat in question.

43. The argument has also been advanced that the Rules of

2025, has been notified on 09.05.2025, is not to be given

effect to so far as agreement entered in between the petitioner

and the JSMDC, which is prior to the date of issuance of

notification dated 9th May, 2025, is concerned.

44. Furthermore, Rule 18 of the Jharkhand Sand Mining

Rules, 2025 prescribes for over-riding effect of rules, wherein

it has been stated that notwithstanding anything contained

in the other rules time being enforced in relation to the

purpose of these rules, these rules shall have the over-riding

effect over those rules.

45. Therefore, submission has been made that Sand Mining

Rules, 2025 is in no way disturbing the Sand Mining Policy

2017 as the legislation giving prospective effect to the Sand

Mining Rules, 2025 and the rules 2025 itself is prospective in

- 42 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

nature and the rule may have retrospective effect if otherwise

said.

46. In support of such submission reference has been made

to the judgment rendered in the case of Darshan Singh Vs.

Ram Pal Singh & Anr. [1992 Supp (1) SCC 191]; State

Bank‟s Staff Union, Madras Circle Vs. The Union of India

& Ors [(2005) 7 SCC 584] and Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh

Sharma & Ors [(2020) 9 SCC 1).

47. Further submission has been made that the

Respondents-State, on the pretext of implementation of

Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, cancelled the

empanelment of Petitioner as MDO and consequential

allotment of Sand Ghat in its favour.

48. Further argument has been advanced that the period of

five years is not to be counted from the date of allotment, as

provided under Rule 4(b) of the notification dated 16th

August, 2017 rather it will be counted form the date of its

operation, as per the provision of Rule 12(4) of the

notification dated 12thDecember, 2017.

49. It is further submitted that from bare perusal of the

Notice Inviting Tender dated 30.09.2021 and Letter of Intent

dated 15.10.2024, which was issued in favour of petitioner, it

would be evident that Petitioner was selected as 'MDO' for a

period of 3+2 years and Petitioner was directed to deposit 5%

- 43 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

of the Contract Value amount as Performance Security. Thus,

even at the time of determination of Performance Security

amount, 5% of the contract value, which was for a period of

five years, was taken into consideration.

50. It is further stated that even Notice Inviting Tender and

Letter of Intent contemplated Additional Security and said

Additional Security was also computed by taking the total

period of contract of five years.

51. It is further case of the petitioners that as per

Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy, 2017 and insertion of Rule

12(4) in JMMC Rules, 2004, the JSMDC was to be the

Deemed Lessee in respect of Sand Ghats operated by it and

the period of such Deemed Lessee is for five years or more, as

provided under the Rules of 2017.

52. In the present case, process for empanelment for

operation of Sand Ghats was initiated in the month of

September, 2022 and Letter of Intent was issued to Petitioner

in October, 2024, which clearly stipulated that Petitioner

shall operate as 'MDO' for a period of 3+2 years after

obtaining all statutory clearances including entering into

Agreement. Therefore, submission has been made that since

agreement has been entered into with Petitioner in WPC No.

3089 of 2025 on 8th May, 2025 which is for a period of five

years and is, thus, schedule to expire on 7th May, 2030, and,

- 44 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

accordingly, even in terms of Rules of 2025, petitioner is

entitled to act as MDO for Sand Ghat in question for the

period of five years, which should not be subject matter of

auction on the principle of accrual of right of the petitioner

upon such agreement.

53. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on the basis of

above submissions, has argued that the period of five years

period will be counted from the date of making it operation

and not from the date of allocation.

54. Further submission has been made that notification

dated 30th September, 2022, to the extent it extends the

tenure of Deemed Lessee of JSMDC in generality by giving

reference to clause 4(b) of Mining Policy of 2017 up to 15 th

August, 2025, is per se, illegal, arbitrary and contrary to

provisions of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second

Amendment) Rules, 2017, particularly Rule 12(4) thereof.

55. Learned counsel for the petitioners have emphatically

argued that Clause 4(b) of the Sand Mining Policy, 2017 read

with Rule 12(4) of the JMMC Rules, 2004 wherein JSMDC

was deemed to be the lessee for operation of category-2 sand

ghats and the period was to commence from the date of

operation of Sand Ghats for a minimum period of five years

and not from any other date. Even in the letter of

- 45 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

empanelment issued in favour of one or the other writ

petitioners, it was for a period of five years.

56. That in view of cumulative facts and circumstances as

mentioned hereinabove, submission has been made that the

action of Respondents in issuing impugned Notification dated

30th September, 2022, to the extent it declares JSMDC as

Deemed Lessee in respect of all Sand Ghats only up to 15 th

August 2025, is wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Rule

12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second

Amendment) Rules, 2017, and, as such, said Notification is

liable to be quashed/set aside.

57. Learned counsel for the petitioners based upon the

aforesaid ground has submitted that the relief sought for in

the writ petitions is fit to be allowed.

Submission on behalf of respondents:

58. Learned Advocate General appearing for the

respondents-State at the outset has submitted that remedy is

available to the petitioners to invoke the arbitration clause 13

to the agreement, if at all they have aggrieved but instead of

invoking the same the writ petitioners have straightway

approached this Court.

59. On merit of the case, submission has been made that

the 'Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017‟ has been

formulated vide Notification dated 16th August, 2017 in

- 46 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the Mines

and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and as

per policy, sand deposit of category-2 was to be managed by

the State Government through the Jharkhand State Mineral

Development Corporation for a minimum period of five years

or more as decided by the Government and as such the same

will be applicable making it operative up-till 5 years from

August, 2017 which will be carried up-to 15th August, 2022.

60. Further submission has been made that the

Government has taken policy decision due to the reasons of

loss in revenue as also under the consideration that the

allocation of Sand Ghats is to be made by auction process

and as such has come out with Jharkhand Sand Mining

Rules, 2025, vide notification dated 9th May, 2025, which is

also in exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the

MMDR Act, 1957 and took a decision that the Sand Deposits

of Category II shall be managed through allocation by

competitive bidding.

61. Further repeal and saving clause has also been inserted

in Rules of 2025 to protect the right of the parties in whose

favour the rights alleged to have been accrued i.e., if the

things done or omitted to be done before such

commencements, the notification dated 9th May, 2025 will not

be applicable. It has been submitted that another provision

- 47 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

has been made in Clause 20(3) to the effect that after the

notification of these rules, any earlier executed lease

deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the validity of lease

deed, or as the period defined in the order for deemed lease;

subsequently the process of mineral concession shall be

adhered to these rules. The reference of notification dated

30th September, 2022 has also been made by which the

validity of the said lease was extended for a further period of

three years from 16.08.2022 i.e., making it operative till

15.08.2025 and thereafter, the status of the JSMDC of lessee

is no more in existence.

62. It has been submitted that all the writ petitioners are

not the lease holder of the State, rather, they have

empanelled as an agent of JSMDC and the moment the

status of the JSMDC of the lessee has done away, the writ

petitioners has no accrued right after the date of validity of

the policy i.e., after 15.08.2025.

63. The argument has been advanced, in response to the

argument advanced on behalf of learned counsel for the writ

petitioners, that the five years period is to be counted from

the date of making operation and not from the date of

allocation of Sand Ghats is concerned, that in view of the

Rules of 2025, decision is to be taken by the State, which is

the exclusive domain of the State Government, hence, no

- 48 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

subsisting right of JSMDCL is there as such no relief can be

granted in favour of writ petitioner on the plea that 5 years

period will be counted from the date of operation, which

would be evident from the clear stipulation made under

clause 4(b) of Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy,2017, that all

the sand deposits in Category 2 shall be allocated to the

JSMDC for a minimum period of five years or more as

decided by the Government, subsequent thereto the same has

been extended for a further period of three years making it

operative till 15.08.2025 vide notification dated 30th

September, 2022.

64. The argument has also been advanced that the

petitioners cannot be said to have subsisting right, said to be

accrued in their favoury virtue of the fact that the petitioners

have been empanelled as an MDO in pursuance to policy

decision dated 16.08.2017 and the moment said policy

decision has been superseded by Rules of 2025, no

subsisting right will be said to be there in favour of writ

petitioners. Hence, it is not a case where right has been

accrued in favour of the petitioners, as is being argued on

their behalf.

65. On the issue of legitimate expectation, as has been

argued on behalf of petitioners, submission has been made

that it is not a case where the principle of legitimate

- 49 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

expectation will be applicable reason being that the writ

petitioners are well conscious the fact with respect to the

validity of the lease entered with the JSMDCL, which was

operational initially for the period of 5 years and

subsequently extended for the further period of three years.

66. Further all the documents, which has been issued in

favour of writ petitioners by way of environmental clearances,

the reference of the validity of the lease period with the

JSMDC finds mentioned, as would be evident from running

page 116 of the paper book wherein under the column

„working details, it has been mentioned that the Life of Mines

- lease period i.e., 15.08.2025, as per the provision of Policy of

Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy 2017, and extendable

based on amendments in Jharkhand State Mining Policy‟.

67. Further, the reference of validity of the said policy

decision are known to the writ petitioners by virtue of

notification itself and based upon that the writ petitioners

have been empanelled as MDOs.

68. In addition thereto, learned Advocate General has

submitted that the State Government is having the

competency to formulate the policy decision and if the Rules

of 2025, has been formulated for the purpose of generating

more revenue by going through the auction process in order

to maintain fairness and transparency, the petitioner cannot

- 50 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

raise any question towards the decision so taken by the

State.

69. It has further been referred therein as under clause 4(V)

of agreement entered in between the JSMDC and the

petitioner(s) the maximum duration of the agreement shall be

governed by Clause 4(b) of the sand mining policy. Duration

of the Agreement may be changed as per amendments made

in the said mining policy.

70. It has further been submitted that in the said agreement

it is stipulated that the above clause shall be subject to the

applicability of the date as per Sand Mining Policy and

currently it is 15.08.2025. This date may further be extended

by the state government, however, in case the extension is

not allowed, then the amended rules, regulations, or policy

shall govern this agreement.

71. Learned Advocate General, based upon the aforesaid

ground, has submitted that the petitioners do not deserve

any relief(s), as sought for, from this Court, hence, the writ

petitions are fit to be dismissed.

72. In support of his submission, learned Advocate General

relied upon following judgments-(i) UPPTCL V. CG Power and

Industrial Solutions Ltd., reported in (2021)6SCC15 (ii)

State of U.P. v. Bridge & Roof Co.(India) Ltd. reported in

(1996) 6 SCC 22 (iii) Joshi Technologies International

- 51 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Inc. v. Union of India reported in (2014) 8 SCC 319 (iv)

Commercial Tax Officer v. Binani Cements reported in

(2014) 8 SCC 319 and (iv) Prestige Lights Ltd. V. state

bank of India reported in (2007) 8 SCC 449

Analysis

73. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone

through the pleadings available on record as also the

documents/notifications/relevant rules applicable in the case

at hand.

74. This Court, on appreciation of the argument advanced

on behalf of parties, is of the view that following issues are

required to be considered for adjudication of lis:

I.Whether after expiry of the validity period of the policy

decision, based upon the same, the empanelment of the

writ petitioners as MDOs have been made, can the writ

petitioners have the subsisting/accrued right after expiry

of the Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017 and

coming into existence new "Jharkhand Sand Mining

Rules, 2025" ?

II.Whether the period of five years functioning as MDOs is

to be counted from the date of allotment as per the policy

decision as notified by policy decision formulated under

the power conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR Act,

- 52 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

1957 or from the date of its operation, as claimed by the

petitioners.

III. Whether the policy decision dated 30th September,

2022, to the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral

Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand

Ghats only up to 15th August, 2025, is arbitrary and

contrary to the vice of Article 14 of the Constitution of

India.

75. Since all the issues are inter-linked, as such they are

being considered together.

76. But before considering the aforesaid issues the relevant

facts and background of the policy decision having been

issued by the State Government time to time needs to refer

herein.

77. The Department of Industries, Mines and Geology,

Government of Jharkhand vide Notification dated 16th

August, 2017 promulgated 'Jharkhand State Sand Mining

Policy, 2017‟ in exercise of the power conferred under Section

15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)

Act, 1957. Under the said Sand Mining Policy, 2017, sand

deposits were categorized into two category i.e., Category-1

and Category-2, and the later category i.e., Category No. 2 is

the subject matter of present writ applications.

- 53 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

78. In the preamble of the Jharkhand State Sand Mining

Policy-2017, it is stated that sand is a very important minor

mineral, which is closely connected with the basic need of the

common people and plays a vital role in the infrastructural

development of the State. Under Jharkhand Minor Mineral

Concession Rule, 2017, sand is placed in Schedule-2 and is

regulated and governed by Rule 12.

79. In compliance of the Supreme Court ruling of Deepak

Kumar v/s State of Haryana etc. (Special Leave Petition

12-13 of 2011), and subsequent MoEF&CC Guidelines, the

State has made certain amendments in the year 2014 and

later in February 2017. However it was felt that there is a

need for an environmentally sustainable and social centric

comprehensive sand mining policy which will fulfill the

developmental needs of the State as well as regular and

adequate supply of sand at a reasonable price for the

common people of the State. Therefore, with a view to achieve

these objectives, after detailed, careful examination,

consultations and consideration of various aspects, the

Government has introduced a comprehensive Jharkhand

State Sand Mining Policy 2017, which will broadly and

effectively guide sand mining in the State in an

environmentally sustainable and socially responsible manner.

- 54 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

80. At clause 2 of the Policy of 2017, there is stipulation

about the identification of the sand available in different

order of streams such as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th order or

more, which shall be carried out by the District Survey

Committee based on its size and capacity. At Clause 2, it has

been stated that based on District Survey Report that the

Survey Committee shall categorize the sand in 1st order and

2nd order stream/river as Category-1 and 3rd order and above

as Category-2. However, based on recommendation of District

Survey Committee and depending upon local

conditions/requirements, the State may review and change

the positioning of a particular order of stream/river into a

particular category of Category-1 or Category-2.

81. At clause 3, the management of Sand Deposits of

Category-1 Streams/Rivers has been dealt with, wherein it

has been stated that the sand deposits of Category-1

stream/rivers will be kept fully free from domain of grant of

mining lease. The sand from this category can be used only

for non-commercial purposes such as domestic purpose,

Community purposes, Government Sponsored Schemes etc.

82. The management of Sand Deposits of Category-2

Streams/Rivers, which is subject matter of present writ

petitions, has been mentioned at Clause 4, which says that

the Sand deposits of Category-2 shall be managed by State

- 55 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Government through Jharkhand State Mineral Development

Corporation Limited (JSMDC).

83. Clause 4(b) of Policy of 2017, upon which much

emphasis has been made by the parties, specifically

stipulates that all the sand deposits in Category-2 shall be

allocated to JSMDC for a minimum period of 5 years or more

as decided by the Government. The sand is decided to be sold

by the JSMDC on commercial basis in consultation with the

Government. The JSMDC shall obtain all clearances such as

Environmental Clearance, Mining Plan or any other statutory

requirements for sand mining, storage and sale and further

the JSMDC shall ensure compliance of all applicable rules,

regulations, guidelines, directives of courts etc. as also the

JSMDC shall ensure that no Sand mining is carried out in

any such zone or depth as prohibited under MoEF&CC

Guidelines.

84. For ready reference, clause 4 of Policy of 2017, is quoted

as under:

4. Management of Sand Deposits of Category-2 Streams/Rivers:-

a. The Sand deposits of Category-2 shall be managed by State Government through Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited (JSMDC).

b. All the sand deposits in Category-2 shall be allocated to JSMDC for a minimum period of 5 years or more as decided by the Government.

c. Sand shall be sold by the JSMDC on commercial basis.

- 56 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

d. The sale price of sand shall be decided by JSMDC in consultation with the Government.

e. JSMDC shall obtain all clearances such as Environmental Clearance, Mining Plan or any other statutory requirements for sand mining, storage and sale.

f. JSMDC shall ensure compliance of all applicable rules, regulations, guidelines, directives of honourable courts etc. g. JSMDC shall ensure that no Sand mining is carried out in any such zone or depth as prohibited under MoEF&CC Guidelines. h. JSMDC shall adopt scientific and sustainable mining practices and shall ensure a transparent, fair and effective delivery system. i. JSMDC shall adopt appropriate technology such as RFID/GPS tracking of vehicles, CCTV surveillance, central monitoring, cashless online sale etc. to prevent illegal mining and transportation of sand.

j. State shall reimburse the entire expenditure incurred by JSMDC for operation and maintenance of sand ghats and also pay suitable agency commission as fixed by the Government.

85. Subsequent thereto, another notification was issued on

12th December, 2017 that is also in exercise of power

conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957, namely,

„Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment)

Rules, 2017‟ by which the relevant provisions of JMMC Rules,

2004 has been amended by insertion of provision as

contained Rule 12 wherein it has been provided as under:

-12(1):-

Jharkhand State Sand Minin Policy, 2017

।

-12(2):-


                                                                           /



                             ,                    ,              औ


                                     - 57 -
                                                 2025:JHHC:30369-DB




               ।
                     -12(3)-

                                   /
                                    ।

-12(4)- Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017

० Deemed Lessee

।

          (iv)            -54(6)                                 "              "
                 "                                     "                            ।

86. Pursuant thereto, „Notice Inviting Expression of Interest‟

was issued on 30.09.2021 for empanelment of Mine

Developer-cum-Operator [MDO] for obtaining statutory

clearances, excavation and transpiration of sand from Sand

Ghats to Stock yards.

87. It is evident from „Notice Inviting Expression of Interest‟

as under chapter 1.B, which deals with the 'Term of

Empanelment‟, that the empanelment of each MDO shall

be valid for 5(five) years from the date of empanelment

subject to annual renewal by JSMDC as per satisfactory

performance and compliance. After the expiry of 5 (five)

years, renewal of empanelment of the MDO, if applicable,

- 58 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

shall be subject to satisfaction of JSMDC. For ready reference

Chapter 1.B is quoted as under:

"1.B.Term of Empanelment :

The Empanelment of each MDO shall be valid for 5 (Five) years from the date of empanelment subject to annual renewal by JSMDCL as per satisfactory performance and compliance. Moreover, JSMDCL reserves the right to cancel the empanelment of any particular applicant during the empanelment period due to unsatisfactory performance or material default / breach of terms and condition of contract agreement for a particular sand ghat.

It may also be noted that JSMDC shall be entitled to empanel any other MDO during the said period of 5 (five) years subject to such MDO fulfilling the eligibility criteria set out in this Notice Inviting EoI or any other criteria as notified in new EoI."

88. Petitioners, in pursuance to floating of EoI made

applications and accordingly the letters of empanelments

have been issued in favour of one or the other writ petitioners

on different dates empanelling as MDO. In the first batch

case i.e., in WPC No. 3089 of 2025, the letter of empanelment

has been issued on 30.09.2022.

89. In the letter of empanelment, it is clearly provided that

the validity of the empanelment shall be for a period of five

years from the date of issuance of this letter or till the validity

of status of JSMDC as deemed lessee for category 2 sand

ghats subject to annual renewal by the JSMDC. The relevant

- 59 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

portion of the letter of empanelment dated 30.09.2022

(Annexure-4) is quoted herein below-

"Your empanelment shall be valid for 5 (five) years from the date of issuance of this Letter of Empanelment or till the validity of status of JSMDL as deemed lessee for Category-II sand ghats subject to annual renewal by the JSMDC as per satisfactory performance and compliance. After the expiry of 5 (five) year, renewal or empanelment of the MDO, if applicable, shall be at the sole discretion of JSMDC...

90. Thereafter, the Department of Mines and Geology, come

out with resolution date 31st March, 2022, whereby it was

decided that for appointment of MDO for conduction of sand

ghats it will be done through e-tender.

91. Then, the Jharkhand State Mineral Development

Corporation Limited [JSMDC] issued „invitation of financial

proposal from empanelled MDOs for Sand Ghat of JSMDC on

02.09.2024.

92. Pursuant thereto, the Letters of Intent [LoI] has been

issued on 15.10.2024 for selection of MDO for obtaining

statutory clearance, excavation and transpiration of sand

from Sand Ghats to Stock yards, setting up and maintence of

stock-yards loading of sands in the vehicle from both sand

ghat and stockyard of the buyers.

- 60 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

93. The JSMDC in pursuance to the same has made

application for getting the environmental clearance which has

been granted in favour of JSMDC.

94. It is evident from the said environmental clearance

dated 22.01.2025 issued by the SEIAA [State Environment

Impact Assessment Authority] that at column 10 „Mine Life‟,

it is stated that „Lease Period i.e., 15.08.2025, as per the

provisions of Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017

extendable based on in JSMDC policy‟.

95. Further, at Column No. L.25, running page 139 of the

paper book, it is stated that the environmental clearance

accorded shall be valid for the period of lease of the mine. The

clause 25 is quoted as under:

"25.The Environmental Clearance accorded shall be valid for

the period of lease of the mine. The PP shall not increase

production rate and alter lease area during the validity of

Environmental Clearance."

96. Thereafter, the agreement has been entered in between

the JSMDC, the first party and one or the other writ

petitioners as the second party on different dated. The same

is depicted in the tabular chart:

      Sl. No. Case No.                        Date of Agreement

      1.     W.P.(C) No. 4503 of 2025         19.02.2024

      2.     W.P.(C) No. 3089 of 2025         08.05.2025




                          - 61 -
                                     2025:JHHC:30369-DB




     3.     W.P.(C) No. 3162 of 2025           08.05.2025

     4.     W.P.(C) No. 3163 of 2025           08.05.2025

     5.     W.P.(C) No. 3164 of 2025           08.05.2025

     6.     W.P.(C) No. 3387 of 2025           22.01.2024

     7.     W.P.(C) No. 3884 of 2025           19.01.2024

     8.     W.P.(C) No. 4504 of 2025           09.05.2025

     9.     W.P.(C) No. 4514 of 2025           19.02.2024

     10.    W.P.(C) No. 4515 of 2025           19.02.2024

     11.    W.P.(C) No. 4537 of 2025           20.08.2024

     12.    W.P.(C) No. 4543 of 2025           08.05.2025



     14.    W.P.(C) No. 4700 of 2025           02.05.2025

97. The said agreement contains a condition as clause no. 4

referring therein the „Term of Empanelment and Contract

Period‟, wherein it has been stipulated that the

Empanelment of each MDO shall be valid for 5 (Five) years

from the date of empañelment subject to annual renewal by

JSMDCL as per satisfactory performance and compliance.

Further, JSMDCL reserves the right to cancel the

empanelment of any particular applicant during the

empanelment period due to unsatisfactory performance or

material default / breach of terms and condition of contract

agreement for a particular sand ghat. It is further stated that

the tenure of the Agreement (Contract Period) shall be of 3

years from the commencement date, which can further be

- 62 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

extended for maximum of 2 more years by mutual consent of

JSMDCL and the MDO on the basis of MDOs performance.

98. The condition has also been stipulated under clause 4(v)

of the said agreement that maximum duration of the

agreement shall be governed by clause as mentioned in

clause 4(b) of sand mining policy. Duration of the Agreement

may be changed as per amendments made in the sand

mining policy. In the said clause, it has further been stated

that the above clause shall be subject to the applicability of the

date as per Sand mining policy and currently it is 15.08.2025.

This date may be further extended by the state government,

however in case the extension is not allowed, then the

amended rules, regulations, or policy shall govern this

agreement.

99. For ready reference, the clause 4 of the agreement is

quoted as under:

"4.Term of Empanelment and Contract Period. The Empanelment of each MDO shall be valid for 5 (Five) years from the date of empañelment subject to annual renewal by JSMDCL as per satisfactory performance and compliance. Moreover, JSMDCL reserves the right to cancel the empanelment of any particular applicant during the empanelment period due to unsatisfactory performance or material default / breach of terms and condition of contract agreement for a particular sand ghat.

This is further to be noted that

- 63 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

i. The Tenure of the Agreement (Contract Period) shall be of 3 years from the commencement date, which can further be extended for maximum of 2 more years by mutual consent of JSMDCL and the MDO on the basis of MDOs performance. ii. In case, the commencement of date of work, does not occur within one year of signing of agreement, further reasoned decision would be taken by JSMDCL for the commencement of work, and if the Agreement is terminated in this regard, performance security shall be forfeited if MDO is responsible for non-commencement of sand mining excavation work, and if MDO is not responsible then performance security shall be returned to the MDO.

iii.During the period between the date of signing of agreement and commencement date of work, all the terms and conditions of the tender, subsequent corrigendum thereto, letter of award & Agreement will be applicable.

iv. Notwithstanding anything stated in the Sand Mining Agreement, at any time, JSMDCL reserves the right to terminate the contract after giving one-month prior notice with opportunity of hearing and shall be entitled to get any pending work completed at the MDOs risk and cost. V. Maximum duration of the agreement shall be governed by clause as mentioned in clause 4(b) of sand mining policy. Duration of the Agreement may be changed as per amendments made in the sand mining policy. The Above clause shall be subject to the applicability of the date as per Sand mining policy and currently it is 15.08.2025. This date may be further extended by the state government, however in case the extension is not allowed, then the amended rules, regulations, or policy shall govern this agreement.

It may also be noted that JSMDCL shall be entitled to empanel any other MDO during the said period of 3 (three) and or 5 (five) years, as the case may be applicable, subject to such

- 64 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

MDO fulfilling the eligibility criteria set out in this Notice inviting Eol or any other criteria as notified in new Eol. This is further clarified that JSMDCL shall be entitled to appoint any new MDOs after the term of F3 (three) and or 5 (five) years, applicable."

100. Thereafter, another notification came on 9th May, 2025

by the Department of Mines and Geology in exercise of power

conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957, in the

name of „Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025‟ which came

into force from the date of publication of notification in

Jharkhand e-gazette i.e., 13th May, 2025.

101. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that

the said Rules of 2025 is in departure of the earlier policy

decision since by virtue of new Rules of 2025 the sand

deposits of Category-2 is said to be managed through

allocation by competitive bidding [e-auction], while in the

earlier policy decision, it was to be done by the JSMDC on

commercial basis by appointing MDO.

102. However, the Rules of 2025 dated 9th May, 2025

contains „repeal and saving clause‟ upon which both the

parties have relied upon. The Rule 20(1) thereof stipulates

that on the commencement of these rules, the Jharkhand

Sand Mining Policy 2017 and its subsequent amendments

shall cease to be in force except as regards things, done or

omitted to be done before such commencements.

- 65 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

103. Sub-rule 20(2) thereof provides that on the

commencement of these rules, any matter or act to which

these rules apply, any reference to the Jharkhand Sand

Mining Policy 2017 in the rules made under the Act or any

other documents shall be deemed to be replaced with the

Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules 2025 to that extent, it is not

repugnant to the context thereof.

104. Sub-Rule 3 thereof provides that after the notification of

these rules, any earlier executed lease deed/deemed lease

shall be valid till the date of validity of lease deed or as period

defined in the order for deemed lease; subsequently the

process of mineral concession shall be adhered to these rules.

Sub-rule 2 thereof provides that on the commencement of

these rules, for matter connected with the period/extension

of earlier allocated sand ghats, keeping in view the provisions,

order of the Courts if any; decision shall be taken by the

Department of Mines and Geology. Rule 20 of Jharkhand

Sand Mining Rules, 2025 is quoted herein below-

"20. Repeal and Saving: -

1.On the commencement of these rules, the Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy 2017 and its subsequent amendments shall cease to be in force except as regards things, done of omitted to be done before such commencements.

2.On the commencement of these rules, any matter or act to which these rules apply, any reference to the Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy 2017 in the rules made under the Act or any other documents shall be deemed to be replace with the

- 66 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules 2025 to that extent, it is not repugnant to the context thereof.

3. After the notification of these rules, any earlier executed lease deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the date of validity of lease deed or as period defined in the order for deemed lease; subsequently the process of mineral concession shall be adhered to these rules.

4.On the commencement of these rules, for matter connected with the period/extension of earlier allocated sand ghats, keeping in view the provisions, order of Hon'ble Courts if any etc; decision shall be taken by the Department of Mines and Geology.

105. The State of Jharkhand has also come out with

notification dated 30th September, 2022 by which the validity

of the status of JSMDC of the deemed lessee has been

extended for a further period of 3 years from 16.08.2022

making it operative till 15.08.2025.

106. It is, thus, evident that the validity of the decision of

giving status of JSMDC of the deemed lessee was operative

till 15.08.2025.

107. From the above-noted fact, it is evident that that

reference of date „15.08.2025‟, has been made in as many as

three documents-

(1) In the environmental clearance dated 22.01.2025

(Annexure-9) issued by the SEIAA [State

Environment Impact Assessment Authority] at

column 10 „Mine Life‟, it is stated that Lease Period

i.e., 15.08.2025.

- 67 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

(2) In the agreement dated 08.05.2025(Anneuure-11)

between the parties, containing condition in clause

no. 4 as „Term of Empanelment and Contract

Period‟ wherein it is stated that applicability of date

as per sand mining policy is 15.08.2025.

(3) In the notification dated 30th September,

2022(Annexure-14), the validity of the status of

JSMDC of the deemed lessee has been extended for

a further period of 3 years from 16.08.2022 making

it operative till 15.08.2025.

108. On the basis of above factual aspect, this Court is now

proceeding to examine the argument on behalf of the parties.

109. The main plank of argument of learned counsel for the

petitioners is with respect to „accrual of right‟ and „breach

of principles of Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation‟.

110. There is no doubt that once the right has been accrued

in favour of any individual the same cannot be snatched

away or taken away by virtue of enactment of the subsequent

rule(s)/policy decision/resolution. The aforesaid position of

law is evident from provision of Section 6 of the General

Clauses Act particularly the sub-section (c) thereof.

111. For ready reference Section 6 of the General Clauses Act

is quoted as under:

"6. Effect of repeal. --Where this Act, or any [Central Act] or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act,

- 68 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not--

(a) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect; or

(b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder; or

(c) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed; or

(d) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed; or

(e) affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid;

and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act or Regulation had not been passed.

112. It is, thus, evident from perusal of Section 6 thereof that

in a case of repealment of the earlier enactment no right will

be said to be accrued by virtue of the repelled Act but if the

right has been accrued then the same will be said to be done

in pursuance to the subsequent rule thereby the saving right

will accrue in favour of one or the other individual.

113. The aforesaid position of law has been settled by Hon‟ble

Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Mohar Singh,

(1954) 2 SCC 483. In this case Hon‟ble Apex Court has laid

down that Section 6 of the General Clause Act would be

applicable unless the new legislation manifests an intention

incompatible with or contrary to the provisions of the section

- 69 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

and Hon‟ble Apex court has also said that the line of enquiry

would be, not whether the new Act expressly keeps alive old

rights and liabilities but whether it manifests an intention to

destroy them. For ready reference, paragraph-14 of the the

judgment is quoted as under:-

"14. The line of enquiry would be, not whether the new Act expressly keeps alive old rights and liabilities but whether it manifests an intention to destroy them. We cannot therefore subscribe to the broad proposition that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act is ruled out when there is repeal of an enactment followed by a fresh legislation. Section 6 would be applicable in such cases also unless the new legislation manifests an intention incompatible with or contrary to the provisions of the section. Such incompatibility would have to be ascertained from a consideration of all the relevant provisions of the new law and the mere absence of a saving clause is by itself not material. It is in the light of these principles that we now proceed to examine the facts of the present case."

114. Here it would be pertinent to see the judgment of

Hon‟ble Apex court in case of Gammon India Ltd. v. Spl.

Chief Secy., (2006) 3 SCC 354 wherein the effect of

repeal and re-enactment has been dealt. In this case

Hon‟ble Apex court has laid down that a clear legislative

intention of the re-enacted enactment has to be inferred

and gathered whether it intended to preserve all the rights

and liabilities of a repealed statute intact or modify or to

obliterate them altogether. For ready reference paragraph-

73 of the judgment rendered in the case of Gammon India

- 70 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Ltd.(supra) is quoted as under: -

"73. On critical analysis and scrutiny of all relevant cases and opinions of learned authors, the conclusion becomes inescapable that whenever there is a repeal of an enactment and simultaneous re-enactment, the re- enactment is to be considered as reaffirmation of the old law and provisions of the repealed Act which are thus re-enacted continue in force uninterruptedly unless the re-enacted enactment manifests an intention incompatible with or contrary to the provisions of the repealed Act. Such incompatibility will have to be ascertained from a consideration of the relevant provisions of the re-enacted enactment and the mere absence of the saving clause is, by itself, not material for consideration of all the relevant provisions of the new enactment. In other words, a clear legislative intention of the re-enacted enactment has to be inferred and gathered whether it intended to preserve all the rights and liabilities of a repealed statute intact or modify or to obliterate them altogether."

(Emphasis supplied)

115. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel for the petitioners

has taken the ground of accrued right on the basis of the fact

that after having been empanelled by the JSMDC in

pursuance to the Policy of 2017, and based upon that the

environmental clearance and other required documents was

also issued by the competent authorities, hence, the case of

the writ petitioners will come under the fold of Rule 20(1) of

Rules of 2025, wherein it has been provided that on the

commencement of these rules, the Jharkhand Sand Mining

- 71 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Policy, 2017 and its subsequent amendments shall cease to

be in force except as regards things, done or omitted to be

done before such commencements.

116. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that

since one or the writ petitioners have been empanelled and

the environmental clearance has also been given by the

competent authority hence it cannot be disputed that the

things has not been done and thereby the right of the writ

petitioners is saved in view of provision of Rule 20(1) Rules of

2025.

117. Contrary to the same, learned Advocate General has

submitted by referring to Rule 20(3) of Rules of 2025 that

after the notification of these rules, any earlier executed lease

deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the validity of lease

deed, or as the period defined in the order for deemed lease;

subsequently the process of mineral concession shall be

adhered to these rules.

118. The learned Advocate General in addition to the

aforesaid has also submitted that the things which is being

said to be done is not in favour of the writ petitioners rather

JSMDC as an agent and the moment the validity of the lease

itself expires by virtue of enactment of subsequent Rules of

2025, in exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the

MMDR Act, 1957 coupled with the fact that the reference of

- 72 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

the date of validity as 15.08.2025 has also been made in the

said documents i.e., in environmental clearance dated

22.01.2025 (Annexure-9), agreement dated

08.05.2025(Anneuure-11) in clause no. 4(v) and in the

notification dated 30th September, 2022(Annexure-14).

Hence, it is not a case where there is any accrued right which

is being claimed by the petitioner.

119. We, on consideration of the aforesaid submission, have

examined the different documents along with the policy

decisions and enactments.

120. The first policy decision is dated 16th August, 2017

issued in exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the

MMDR Act, 1957, in which specific condition has been

stipulated as under Rule 4 (b), which says that all the sand

deposits in Category-2 shall be allocated to JSMDC for a

minimum period of 5 years or more as decided by the

Government.

121. Thereafter, by virtue of amendment having been

incorporated in the JMMC Rules, 2004 in exercise of power

conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957, the

Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment)

Rules, 2017 has come which was notified on 12th December,

2017 inserting a provision as 12(4) whereby the JSMDC has

been given the status of „deemed lessee‟.

- 73 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

122. Hence, it is evident that sand deposits in Category-2

shall be allocated to JSMDC for a minimum period of 5 years,

subject to extension to be decided by the government.

Therefore, as per Rule 12(4) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral

Concession (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017 which was

notified on 12th December, 2017, the status of JSMDC of

deemed lessee will be valid up-to the period of 5 years.

Thereafter, as per notification dated 30th September,2022,

tenure of deemed lessee JSMDC was extend for three years

from 16.08.2022 meaning thereby the same will be operative

up to 15.08.2025.

123. Further, the Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy, 2017, has

been ceased by virtue of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand

Mining Rules,2025, by notification dated 9th May, 2025

wherein also specific reference has been made at Rule 20(3)

that after the notification dated 9th May, 2025, any earlier

executed lease deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the

validity of lease deed or as period defined for deemed lease. It

is reiterated herein that one or the other writ petitioners has

not been granted the status of deemed lessee rather they are

agent of the deemed lessee i.e., JSMDC.

124. The question of accrued right only on the ground of

empanelment MDO of the one or the writ petitioners by virtue

of the Letter of Empanelment dated 30.09.2022 and based

- 74 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

upon that the agreement between the parties dated 8th

May,2025 and other documents have been issued has been

taken as a ground to for „Legitimate Expectation‟ or the

accrued right but it cannot be accepted since in the said

Letter of Empanelment, the specific term of empanelment

has been referred that the empanelment of MDO shall be

valid for a period of five years from the date of issuance of

Letter of Empanelment or till the validity of the status of

JSMDL as a deemed lessee for the Category-II sand ghats

subject to annual renewal by the JSMDC. After the expiry of

five years renewal of empanelment of the MDO, if applicable

shall be at the sole discretion of JSMDC.

125. It is admitted case herein that validity of empanelment

of one or the other writ petitioners as MDOs, remain for a

period of 5 years having not been extended by the JSMDC.

126. It is also evident from the Letter of Empanelment dated

30.09.2022 that the same has been made valid for a period of

five years from the date of issuance of the letter of

empanelment or till the validity of status of JSMDC as

deemed lessee for Category II Sand Ghats subject to annual

renewal. It is evident from the letter of empanelment that the

petitioners have already been apprised that empanelment is

valid for a period of 5 years from the date of issuance of letter

- 75 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

of empanelment or till the validity of the status of JSMDC as

deemed lessee.

127. Here, it is not in dispute that the validity of the status of

JSMDC as deemed lessee has been ceased to be operative

after 15.08.2025 by virtue of notification dated 30.09.2022.

Even Environmental Clearance dated 22.01.2025 issued by

SEIAA at Column 10 „Mine Life‟ it is stated that lease period

to be 15.08.2025 as per provision of Jharkhand State Sand

Mining Policy, 2017.

128. This Court has found that there is specific condition

referred in the Letter of Empanelment that the validity will

depend upon the status of the deemed lessee and admittedly

the JSMDC itself has expired after 15.08.2025. Hence, it is

not the question of accrued right or legitimate expectation, as

has been taken as a ground for seeking relief, and is being

claimed on behalf of petitioners on the basis of Rule 20(1) of

Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, which was notified by

notification dated 9th May, 2025 in which accrued right is

being claimed, but, the same is ceased to operate after

15.08.2025 by virtue of issuance of notification dated

30.09.2022.

129. Admittedly, the writ petitioners have accepted the terms

and conditions of the Letter of empanelment dated

30.09.2022 and once it has been accepted that their status

- 76 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

will be only of the MDOs depending upon the validity of

status of the deemed lessee i.e., JSMDC then it is not

available to raise the issue of „accrued right‟ or „legitimate

expectation‟.

130. It is also evident that validity of five years has also been

given in documents such as in clause 4 of Policy of 2017,

wherein it has been noted that sand deposit in category-2

shall be allocated to JSMDC for a minimum period of 5 years

and in invitation of Financial Proposal from Empanelled

MDOs at Clause 5.3 under „contract period‟, tenure of

agreement is written as 3 years from the commencement

date, which was further extendable to 2 more years.

131. Further Rule 20(3) of Rules of 2025 also provides that

after notification of these rules, any earlier executed lease

deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the validity of lease

deed, or as the period defined in the order for deemed lease;

subsequently the process of mineral concession shall be

adhered to these rules.

132. This Court is of the view that Rule 20 since contains

sub-provisions (3) hence all the provisions are required to be

read together in entirety and not in piecemeal. Although Rule

20(1) of Rules of 2025 provides by saving the right to the

effect that on the commencement of these rules, the

Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy 2017 and its subsequent

- 77 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

amendments shall cease to be in force except as regards

things, done or omitted to be done before such

commencements, but when Rule 20(1) will be read together

with Rule 20(3), wherein it has specifically been provided that

after the notification of these rules, any earlier executed lease

deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the validity of lease

deed, or as the period defined in the order for deemed lease.

133. Herein, by virtue of notification dated 30.09.2022, the

status of the deemed lessee i.e., JSMDC became in-

operational after 15.08.2025, hence, this Court is of the view

that the petitioner will have no accrued right.

134. So far as the issue of legitimate expectation, on the

basis of agreement, so entered in between the petitioner and

the JSMDC and empanelment of the petitioner as MDO, is

concerned, the parties have entered into the agreement with

clear stipulation as mentioned in clause 4 that the

empanelment of MDO would be for 5 years, but the same is

subject to proviso to clause 4, which says that above clause

shall be subject to the applicability of the date as per Sand

Mining Policy and currently it is 15.08.2025. Therefore, on this

ground the petitioner has failed to make out a case on the

ground of legitimate expectation.

135. The view of this Court gets fortified by the law laid down

by Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India v.

- 78 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

Hindustan Development Corpn., (1993) 3 SCC 499,

wherein Hon‟ble Apex Court while dealing on the issue of

doctrine of legitimate expectation has laid down that the

doctrine of legitimate expectation does not give scope to claim

relief straightaway from the administrative authorities as no

crystallized right as such is involved and a case of legitimate

expectation would arise when a body by representation or by

past practice aroused expectation which it would be within its

powers to fulfill. In this case Apex Court has further laid

down that if it is a question of policy, even by way of change

of old policy, the courts cannot interfere with a decision. For

ready reference, paragraph-33 of the judgment is quoted as

under: -

"33. On examination of some of these important decisions it is generally agreed that legitimate expectation gives the applicant sufficient locus standi for judicial review and that the doctrine of legitimate expectation is to be confined mostly to right of a fair hearing before a decision which results in negativing a promise or withdrawing an undertaking is taken. The doctrine does not give scope to claim relief straightaway from the administrative authorities as no crystallised right as such is involved. The protection of such legitimate expectation does not require the fulfilment of the expectation where an overriding public interest requires otherwise. In other words where a person's legitimate expectation is not fulfilled by taking a particular decision then decision-maker should justify the denial of such expectation by showing some overriding public interest. Therefore even if substantive protection of such expectation is contemplated that does not grant an absolute right to a

- 79 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

particular person. It simply ensures the circumstances in which that expectation may be denied or restricted. A case of legitimate expectation would arise when a body by representation or by past practice aroused expectation which it would be within its powers to fulfil. The protection is limited to that extent and a judicial review can be within those limits. But as discussed above a person who bases his claim on the doctrine of legitimate expectation, in the first instance, must satisfy that there is a foundation and thus has locus standi to make such a claim. In considering the same several factors which give rise to such legitimate expectation must be present. The decision taken by the authority must be found to be arbitrary, unreasonable and not taken in public interest. If it is a question of policy, even by way of change of old policy, the courts cannot interfere with a decision. In a given case whether there are such facts and circumstances giving rise to a legitimate expectation, it would primarily be a question of fact. If these tests are satisfied and if the court is satisfied that a case of legitimate expectation is made out then the next question would be whether failure to give an opportunity of hearing before the decision affecting such legitimate expectation is taken, has resulted in failure of justice and whether on that ground the decision should be quashed. If that be so then what should be the relief is again a matter which depends on several factors."

(emphasis supplied)

136. In the present case, it is the policy decision of the State

Government to change the old policy, wherein, earlier sand

ghats were allocated through JSMDC as deemed lessee

under Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017. Now,

Jharkhand State Sand Mining Policy, 2017 has expired by

coming into existence of new Jharkhand Sand Mining

Rules, 2025 by notification dated 9th May,2025, and in this

- 80 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

new Rule of 2025 provision has been made that allocation

of sand ghats will be done through competitive bidding by

e-auction. Hence, this court would not interfere as per

ratio laid down in Union of India v. Hindustan

Development Corpn., (Supra) in matters relating to

change of old policy viz. Jharkhand State Sand Mining

Policy, 2017 and replacing it by new Jharkhand Sand

Mining Rules, 2025. Further, the ground of legitimate

exception is also not available to the petitioners as

petitioners have no crystalized right as the status of

JSMDC as a deemed lessee was only up to 15.08.2025 as

per notification dated 30th September,2022 and also on

account of the fact that the Jharkhand Sand Mining

Policy,2017 has been ceased by virtue of Rule 20(1) of

Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025, by notification dated

9th May, 2025.

137. This Court, in view of discussions made hereinabove

and the law laid down by Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of

Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corpn.,

(Supra), is of the view that the petitioner has neither got

any „accrued right‟ nor „legitimate expectation‟.

138. So far as the argument that the period of five years will

be counted from the date of making it operational and not

from the date of allocation, this Court is in agreement with

- 81 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

the submission advanced by learned Advocate General that

the validity of the bid document under which the right to

operate the sand ghats are being granted in favour of one

other writ petitioners itself has lost its force by virtue of

coming into existence of Jharkhand Sand Mining

Rules,2025, which was notified on 9th May, 2025.

139. Further, relying on the ratio in the case of State of

Punjab (Supra) and Gammon India Ltd. (Supra), we find

that by enacting the new Act „Jharkhand Sand Mining

Rules,2025‟, specific provision has been made to obliterate

the 2017 Police i.e., "Jharkhand State Sand Mining

Policy,2017". The Jharkhand Sand Mining Policy, 2017,

has been ceased by virtue of Rule 20(1) of Jharkhand Sand

Mining Rules, 2025, by notification dated 9th May, 2025

wherein specific reference has been made at Rule 20(3)

that after the notification dated 9th May, 2025, any earlier

executed lease deed/deemed lease shall be valid till the

validity of lease deed or as period defined for deemed lease.

140. Accordingly, the issues no.(I) and (II) has been answered

against the writ petitioners.

141. Now, we are proceeding to decide the issue no.(III) i.e.

whether policy decision dated 30th September, 2022, to the

extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development

Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to

- 82 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

15th August, 2025, is arbitrary and contrary to the vice of

Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

142. So far as the prayer no. 1 (III) is concerned which is for

setting aside the notification dated 30th September, 2022 to

the extent it declares Jharkhand State Mineral Development

Corporation as Deemed Lessee of all Sand Ghats only up to

15th August, 2025, as opposed to being declared as Deemed

Lessee of Sand Ghats for a period of five years from the date

of operation of Sand Ghats, as being violative of Rule 12(4) of

Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second Amendment)

Rules, 2017, is concerned, the validity of the aforesaid policy

decision dated 30th September, 2022 has been questioned on

the ground that the same is in the teeth of provision of Rule

12 (4) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Second

Amendment) Rules, 2017, which was notified on 12th

December, 2017.

143. The provision of Rule 12(4) has given the status to

JSMDC to deemed lessee, however, the same has been taken

away by virtue of new rules Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules,

2025, by notification dated 9th May, 2025.

144. We are conscious that the validity of the Rule is to be

declared ultra vires if it is in the teeth of the parent Act/Rule

or hits the principles as contained under Article 14 of the

Constitution of India.

- 83 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

145. Reference in this regard be made to the judgment

rendered by Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Naresh

Chandra Agrawal Versus Institute of Chartered

Accountants of India and Others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC

114, wherein principles relevant in adjudicating cases where

subordinate legislation are challenged on the ground of being

„ultra vires‟ the parent Act has been dealt with. For ready

reference, paragraph-35 of this judgment is quoted herein

below-

"35. From reference to the precedents discussed above and taking an overall view of the instant matter, we proceed to distil and summarise the following legal principles that may be relevant in adjudicating cases where subordinate legislation are challenged on the ground of being „ultra vires‟ the parent Act:

(a) The doctrine of ultra vires envisages that a Rule making body must function within the purview of the Rule making authority, conferred on it by the parent Act. As the body making Rules or Regulations has no inherent power of its own to make rules, but derives such power only from the statute, it must necessarily function within the purview of the statute. Delegated legislation should not travel beyond the purview of the parent Act.

(b) Ultra vires may arise in several ways; there may be simple excess of power over what is conferred by the parent Act; delegated legislation may be inconsistent with the provisions of the parent Act; there may be non-compliance with the procedural requirement as laid down in the parent Act. It is the function of the courts to keep all authorities within the confines of the law by supplying the doctrine of ultra vires.

(c) If a rule is challenged as being ultra vires, on the ground

- 84 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

that it exceeds the power conferred by the parent Act, the Court must, firstly, determine and consider the source of power which is relatable to the rule. Secondly, it must determine the meaning of the subordinate legislation itself and finally, it must decide whether the subordinate legislation is consistent with and within the scope of the power delegated.

(d) Delegated rule-making power in statutes generally follows a standardized pattern. A broad section grants authority with phrases like „to carry out the provisions‟ or „to carry out the purposes.‟ Another sub-section specifies areas for delegation, often using language like „without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power.‟ In determining if the impugned rule is intra vires/ultra vires the scope of delegated power, Courts have applied the „generality versus enumeration‟ principle.

(e) The "generality versus enumeration" principle lays down that, where a statute confers particular powers without prejudice to the generality of a general power already conferred, the particular powers are only illustrative of the general power, and do not in any way restrict the general power. In that sense, even if the impugned rule does not fall within the enumerated heads, that by itself will not determine if the rule is ultra vires/intra vires. It must be further examined if the impugned rule can be upheld by reference to the scope of the general power.

(f) The delegated power to legislate by making rules „for carrying out the purposes of the Act‟ is a general delegation, without laying down any guidelines as such. When such a power is given, it may be permissible to find out the object of the enactment and then see if the rules framed satisfy the Act of having been so framed as to fall within the scope of such general power confirmed.

(g) However, it must be remembered that such power delegated by an enactment does not enable the authority, by rules/regulations, to extend the scope or general operation of the enactment but is strictly ancillary. It will

- 85 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

authorize the provision of subsidiary means of carrying into effect what is enacted in the statute itself and will cover what is incidental to the execution of its specific provision. In that sense, the general power cannot be so exercised as to bring into existence substantive rights or obligations or disabilities not contemplated by the provisions of the Act itself.

(h) If the rule making power is not expressed in such a usual general form but are specifically enumerated, then it shall have to be seen if the rules made are protected by the limits prescribed by the parent Act."

146. We, after going into the pleading made in the writ

petition, have found that no specific ground has been taken

as to why the policy decision dated 30th September, 2022, is

to be declared invalid save and except the ground that the

right as is being claimed on behalf of petitioner has been

taken by virtue of notification dated 9th May, 2025 by which

Jharkhand Sand Mining Rules, 2025 came into existence.

147. This Court, in order to come to the conclusion as to

whether the policy decision as per notification dated 30th

September, 2022 is in the teeth of amendment incorporated

in the JMMC Rules, 2004 as notified by virtue of notification

dated 12th December, 2017, has gone through both the

notifications and found that the notification dated 12th

December, 2017 has been issued in exercise of power

conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957.

148. The notification dated 9th May, 2025 has also been

issued in exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the

- 86 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

MMDR Act, 1957. Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957 confers

power upon the State to make out rules for the purpose of

regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases and other

mineral concessions for minor minerals. For ready reference,

Section 15 of the MMDR Act,1957, is quoted as under:

"15. Power of State Governments to make rules in respect of minor minerals.― (1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules for, regulating the grant of [quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions] in respect of minor minerals and for purposes connected therewith. [(1A) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:―

(a) the person by whom and the manner in which, applications for quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions may be made and the fees to be paid therefor;

(b) the time within which, and the form in which, acknowledgement of the receipt of any such applications may be sent;

(c) the matters which may be considered where applications in respect of the same land are received within the same day;

(d) the terms on which, and the conditions subject to which and the authority by which quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions may be granted or renewed;

(e) the procedure for obtaining quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions;

- 87 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

(f) the facilities to be afforded by holders of quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions to persons deputed by the Government for the purpose of undertaking research or training in matters relating to mining operations;

(g) the fixing and collection of rent, royalty, fees, dead rent, fines or other charges and the time within which and the manner in which these shall be payable;

(h) the manner in which rights of third parties may be protected (whether by way of payment of compensation or otherwise) in cases where any such party is prejudicially affected by reason of any prospecting or mining operations;

(i) the manner in which rehabilitation of flora and other vegetation such as trees, shrubs and the like destroyed by reason of any quarrying or mining operations shall be made in the same area or in any other area selected by the State Government (whether by way of reimbursement of the cost of rehabilitation or otherwise) by the person holding the quarrying or mining lease;

(j) the manner in which and the conditions subject to which, a quarry lease, mining lease or other mineral concession may be transferred;

(k) the construction, maintenance and use of roads power transmission lines, tramways, railways, serial rope ways, pipelines and the making of passage for water for mining purposes on any land comprised in a quarry or mining lease or other mineral concession;

(l) the form of registers to be maintained under this Act;

(m) the reports and statements to be submitted by holders of quarry or mining leases or other mineral concessions and the authority to which such reports and statements shall be submitted;

- 88 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

(n) the period within which and the manner in which and the authority to which applications for revision of any order passed by any authority under these rules may be made, the fees to be paid therefore, and the powers of the revisional authority; and

(o) any other matter which is to be, or may be, prescribed.] (2) Until rules are made under sub-section (1), any rules made by a state Government regulating the grant of 1 [quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions] in respect of minor minerals which are in force immediately before the commencement of these Act shall continue in force.

[(3) The holder of a mining lease or any other mineral concession granted under any rule made under sub- section (1) shall pay [royalty or dead rent, whichever is more] in respect of minor minerals removed or consumed by him or by his agent, manager, employee, contractor or sub-lessee at the rate prescribed for the time being in the rules framed by the State Government in respect of minor minerals:

Provided that the State Government shall not enhance the rate of [royalty or dead rent] in respect of any minor mineral for more than once during any period of 4 [three] years.] [(4) Without prejudice to sub-sections (1), (2) and sub- section (3), the State Government may, by notification, make rules for regulating the provisions of this Act for the following, namely:―

(a) the manner in which the District Mineral Foundation shall work for the interest and benefit of persons and areas affected by mining under sub-section (2) of section 9B;

- 89 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

(b) the composition and functions of the District Mineral Foundation under sub-section (3) of section 9B; and

(c) the amount of payment to be made to the District Mineral Foundation by concession holders of minor minerals under section 15A.]"

149. The argument that it is in the teeth of statutory

provision had been accepted if the notification dated 9th May,

2025 would have been issued not under the power conferred

under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957 but herein the

notification dated 9th May, 2025 has been issued in exercise

of power conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957.

Since the State Government has been conferred with the

power under Section 15 of the MMDR Act, 1957 to make out

the rules and the State on its own wisdom if has come out

with notification dated 9th May, 2025 for the purpose of

allocation of sand ghats through e-auction in order to follow

the principle of fairness and transparencies as also with a

mission for more revenue generation. Hence, on the basis of

such reason if any departure has been made by taking away

the status of the JMSDC of deemed lessee by Rule 20(3) of

Rules of 2025, which status was conferred inserting Rule

12(4) in JMMC Rules, 2004 by notification dated 12.12.2017

in exercise of power conferred under Section 15 of the MMDR

Act, 1957, then according to our considered view, it cannot

be said that the notification dated 9th May, 2025 is in the

teeth of provision of Rule 12(4) JMMC Rules, 2004 having

- 90 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

been inserted by way of amendment as notified in notification

dated 12th December, 2017. Rather, when we have gone

through the notification dated 9th May, 2025, we have found

particularly from Rule 6.IV.a that the sand deposit of category

2 shall be managed through competitive bidding (e-auction).

The e-auction shall be conducted by the District Committee

as constituted by the Department of Mines and Geology,

Government of Jharkhand under the Chairmanship of

Deputy Commissioner. Further, at clause 6.IV.c, it has been

stated that the reserve price of the auction shall be

determined by the District Committee as per the guidelines

issued by the Directorate of Mines. After two unsuccessful

attempts of auction the Reserve Price shall be re-determined

after due consideration of all socio, technical and economical

aspects. For ready reference, the Rule 6.IV of the notification

dated 9th May,2025, is quoted as under:

IV. Auction of Sand Deposits of Category-2 Streams/Rivers: -

a. The sand deposits of Category-2 shall be managed through allocation by competitive bidding (e-auction). b. The e-auction shall be conducted by the District Committee as constituted by the Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand under chairmanship of Deputy Commissioner.

c. Reserve Price of the auction shall be determined by the District Committee as per the guidelines issued by the Directorate of Mines. After two unsuccessful

- 91 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

attempts of auction the Reserved Price shall be re- determined after due consideration of all socio, technical and economical aspects.

d. Model Tender Document for e-auction shall be prepared by Directorate of Mines.

150. We, after going through the Jharkhand State Sand

Mining Policy, 2017, have found that all the sand deposits in

Category-2 shall be allocated to JSMDC for a minimum

period of 5 years or more as decided by the Government. The

Sand is decided to be sold by the JSMDC on commercial

basis in consultation with the Government, meaning thereby,

JSMDC, since has been given as the status of deemed lessee

by notification dated 12.12.2017 and by Notice Inviting

Expression of Interest dated 30.09.2021 sand is directly to be

sold out through the agent i.e., the writ petitioners herein

who have been empanelled as MDOs.

151. Since we are living in the competitive era and as such if

in such circumstances as also for the purpose of earning

revenue by the process of e-auction in order to get rid of any

intermediary, even in the present case government

undertaking Respondent No.4 Jharkhand State Mineral

Development Corporation Ltd., who is to sold out the sand

through the third party i.e., agent [MDOs] and in such

circumstances the government has taken a decision to

allocate the sand ghats through competitive bidding by the

process of e-auction then the same according to our

- 92 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

considered view cannot be said to suffer from any vice or

malice or arbitrariness rather the bid process once will be

followed then the same will be in the public domain for the

purpose of following the fairness and transparency as also

the government may have the own source of earning through

the bidding process. The bidding process also does not create

any right upon any individual and thereby the monopolistic

right has also been taken care of.

152. This Court, applying the principle to declare the statute

to be invalid as has been decided by the Hon‟ble Apex Court

in the case of Naresh Chandra Agrawal Versus

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and

Others(supra), is of the view that the policy decision dated

30th September, 2022, to the extent it declares Jharkhand

State Mineral Development Corporation as Deemed Lessee of

all Sand Ghats only up to 15th August, 2025, cannot be held

to be arbitrary and contrary to the vice of Article 14 of the

Constitution of India.

153. The ground of saving the right has also been taken into

consideration. The saving of the right depends upon the

accrual of the right, which we have already discussed above.

154. This Court considering the discussion as above is of the

view that the relief as sought for in prayer 1(iii) is not fit to be

extended in favour of the writ petitioner.

- 93 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

155. Accordingly, issue no. (III) is answered against the writ

petitioners.

156. Further, from the notification dated 30.09.2022, it is

evident that the JSMDC was deemed lessee only up-to 15th

August, 2025 and admittedly the State Government has not

extended the same and further it does not come within the

ambit of saving clause, as discussed above, as such the

agreement executed between the JSMDC and the petitioner

has been cancelled vide order dated 01.08.2025, which

requires no interference.

157. So far as the issue raised on behalf of petitioners that

earnest money has been deposited in terms of agreement

dated 8th May, 2025, is concerned, submission has been

made at Bar by learned Advocate General that since the

agreement in between the JSMDC and the petitioner has

been cancelled vide memo no. 1067 dated 01.08.2025 by

JSMDC, as such petitioner has been informed to submit the

details of bank account so that security would be refunded to

the petitioner(s) in terms of the agreement. Further, it has

been submitted that Clause 13 of the Agreement is there

which provides for dispute resolution and arbitration clause,

which may be resorted to by the petitioner, if they are at all

aggrieved.

- 94 -

2025:JHHC:30369-DB

158. This Court in view specific submission advanced by

learned Advocate General to the effect that petitioner has

been informed to submit the details of bank account so that

security be refunded to the petitioner(s) in terms of the

agreement, is of the view that the petitioner, if requires, may

approach to the authority for refund of the security, if any.

Further if there is any dispute regarding it, it is left open to

the writ petitioners to raise the arbitration clause, if the

petitioner so wishes.

159. The issues framed by this Court are answered

accordingly.

160. With the aforesaid observations and directions, all the

writ petitions stand dismissed.

161. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand dispose

of.

              I Agree                                 (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)



           (Arun Kumar Rai, J.)                          (Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

25th , September, 2025

Alankar/
A.F.R




                                       - 95 -