1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Prashant vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|28 January, 2010
1. The petitioner herein has prayed to direct the respondents to decide the application dated 29.09.2006 of the petitioner for mining lease and further to direct the respondents to give priority for deciding the application without considering the notification dated 17.12.2009.
2. The petitioner on 29.09.2006 preferred an application under Form I of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 seeking mining lease of Mineral Quartz admeasuring area of 4 hectares situated at Survey No. 326(3) village sim of Naroda, Panchmahals before the Collector, Mining Department. It is the case of the petitioner that though the petitioner fulfills the requirement for Mining lease to be allotted, the respondent authorities have not paid any heed inspite of opinions from experts in his favour. Further the respondent has been inviting new applications without deciding the petitioner's application which is pending since long. Hence this petition is preferred.
3. Mr.
Mansuri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent no. 1 has passed notification on 17.12.2009 inviting applications for mining lease for survey no. 326/3 of sim of Naroda, Khanpur. He has submitted tht as per section 11(2) of the Act the applicant whose application is received earlier shall have the preferential right to be considered for grant of mining lease over the applicant whose application is received later.
4. This court has heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record. As a result of the said exercise, this court is of the view that in the interest of justice, the following directions are required to be issued:
The application of the petitioner pursuant to the notification dated 17.12.2009 shall be considered within a period of three months from the last date of receipt of applications.
It is made clear that this court has not entered into the merits of the matter.
The respondent authority shall decide the application of the petitioner in accordance with law and relevant provisions of the Act.
5. With the above directions and observations, this petition is disposed of. Direct service is permitted. No costs.
JHAVERI, J.) Divya// Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.