Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/987/2021 on 19 May, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 19TH DAY OF MAY, 2021
BEFORE:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
Writ Petition (M/S) No.987 of 2021
BETWEEN:
M/s Jai Ganga Trading Company .....Petitioner
(By Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate)
AND:
State of Uttarakhand & Others .....Respondents
(By Vinod Nautiyal, Deputy Advocate General along with Mr. Jagdish
Singh Bisht, Standing Counsel)
JUDGMENT
Heard learned counsel for the parties
through vide conferencing.
2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner
has sought the following reliefs:-
i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding/directing the
respondent no.2 to open the seal of the mining
store of the petitioner firm.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
certiorari to quash the inquiry report dated
01.04.2021 prepared by the respondent no.3
and 4 (contained as Annexure no.2 to this writ
petition), within the stipulated period fixed by
this Hon'ble Court.
iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding/directing the
respondent no.1 to take appropriate action
against the respondent no.2 and 4 in accordance
with law.
3. Petitioner has been granted a license for
storage of river bed material. Pursuant to the said
license, he has maintained the facility for storage of
river bed material at Village Jeetpur Bhikampur,
Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar. Petitioner is
aggrieved by an order passed by Sub Divisional
Magistrate, Laksar on 03.04.2021. By the said
order, the storage facility of the petitioner has been
sealed. The reason assigned for sealing the storage
facility is that as per the Inspection Report, certain
shortcomings were found in the storage facility.
Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached
this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the storage facility has been sealed
based on an inspection report submitted by a team
of Revenue Officials consisting of Revenue
Inspector and Revenue Sub Inspectors. He further
submits that Revenue Inspector and Revenue Sub
Inspectors are not competent to make inspection
and superior revenue authorities, namely, District
Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate, Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Tehsildar, Naib Tehsildar
alone are competent for the purpose.
5. Learned Standing Counsel has also not
disputed this submission made on behalf of the
petitioner. He, however, submits that the Show
Cause Notice has been issued to the petitioner on
07.05.2021. He further submits that petitioner's
storage facility has been sealed by the Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Laksar.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has given reply to the
Show Cause Notice on 11.05.2021.
7. Having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case and also in view of the
fact that under the Uttarakhand Minerals
(Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation &
Storage) Rules, 2020, Revenue Inspector and
Revenue Sub Inspectors are not competent for
making inspection, the writ petition is disposed of
with a direction to the District Magistrate, Haridwar
to consider petitioner's reply to the Show Cause
Notice dated 07.05.2021, as early as possible, but,
not later than two weeks from the date of
production of a copy of this order.
8. For a period of two weeks or till decision
is taken on petitioner's reply, whichever is earlier,
impugned order dated 03.04.2021 shall be kept in
abeyance. However, it is made clear that till final
order is passed by the Collector, petitioner shall not
procure river bed material from any source,
whatsoever, but he shall be at liberty to sell-off the
river bed material available with him, but he shall
maintain proper account of the sale so made by
him to enable the authorities specified in Rule 13 of
Uttarakhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining,
Transportation & Storage) Rules, 2020 to make
periodical inspection of his storage facility/stock
and records maintained by the petitioner.
(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)
Rajni
