Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5383 MP
Judgement Date : 31 March, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 31 st OF MARCH, 2023
WRIT APPEAL No. 1112 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, M.P. POWER
TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED, SHAKTI
BHAWAN, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (EHT CONSTRUCTION)
M.P. POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI VIVEK JAIN - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAHUL SHRIVASTAV S/O J K SHRIVASTAV, R/O
TOPEWALA MOHALLA, LASHKAR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT,
VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ANKUR MODY - ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
Th is appeal coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE ROHIT
ARYA passed the following:
ORDER
T his intra-court appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal Adhiniyam, 2005 is directed against the order dated 29-08-2020 passed in Writ Petition No.12361/2020 by the learned Single
Judge.
Respondent - Rahul Shrivastava s/o Shri J.K. Shrivastava r/o Topewala Mohalla, Lashkar Gwalior since avoided service of notice, appellants under the order of this Court dated 15-03-2022 has effected service on the aforesaid respondent through paper publication. News paper cutting with the public notice imprinted thereon in the Dainik Bhaskar edition of the Hindi Dainik dated 05-04-2022 is placed on record. Under such circumstances, service of respondent - Rahul Shrivastava stands completed in view of provision of Order 5 Rule 20 CPC.
Shri Vivek Jain, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the
impugned order was passed in the light of the judgment passed by the Co- ordinate Bench in Writ Petition No.609 of 2007 (M/s Tomar Construction Company Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh) whereas relevant provision contained in Rule 68 of the M.P. Minor Mineral Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred as Rules, 1996) has been amended by incorporating 3rd proviso thereto by No.19 effective from 23-03-2013. For ready reference 3rd proviso is quoted as under:-
"Provided also that quarry permit holder / contractor engaged in construction work shall obtain certificate of no mining dues to ensure payment of royalty for the mineral used in construction work, for the mineral excavated from quarry permit area or used by purchasing from open market. Certificate of no mining dues shall be issued by Mining officer/ officer in- charge mining section, after verification of documents submitted by contractor/ quarry permit holder engaged in construction work."
Shri Jain submits that 3rd proviso to Rules 1996 escaped consideration
of the learned Single Judge while passing the impugned order relying upon the judgment of M/s Tomar (supra). As such, the impugned order is contrary to law.
Shri Mody, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents/ State having gone through the 3rd proviso of the Rules, 1996 confirms the said legal position.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order dated 29-08-2020 passed in Writ Petition No.12361/2020 by the learned Single Judge is hereby set aside. It is hereby held that prior to issuance of quarry permit and transport permit for Minor Mineral, the competent authority is required to ascertain fulfillment of 3rd proviso of the Rules, 1996 amongst other requirements.
With the aforesaid, the writ appeal stands allowed and disposed of.
(ROHIT ARYA) (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2023.04.01
13:24:51
+05'30'
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!