Saurashtra vs State

1. All the captioned petitions have been filed challenging the notice dated 15.07.2004 issued by respondent No.2- Section Officer, Industries, Mines and Energy Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar with regard to alleged non-payment of royalty in respect of lime stone supplied by petitioner Nos. 2 to petitioner No.1, thereby threatening the petitioner Nos. 2 to cancel the mining lease granted to petitioner No.2 without further notice. According to the petitioner, such notices are issued despite the fact that there is no due outstanding amount due and payable by petitioner No.2 towards royalty in respect of lime-stone supplied by petitioner No.2 towards royalty in respect of lime-stone supplied by petitioner Nos. 2 to petitioner No.1 and that petitioner No.1 has already adjusted the amount due and payable by petitioner No.2 in respect of the royalty as against outstanding amount refundable by respondents to the petitioner No.1.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioners stated that in view of communication dated 19.01.2010, the Geology and Mining Department, Porbandar had honoured the order and adjusted the said amount against the outstanding due royalty amount of captive mines as well as outside parties by preparing the respective challans and squaring up the A/cs. Hence, the impugned notices issued by the respondent No.2 would not survive and petitions may be dismissed.

3. In view of the communication dated 19.01.2010, the impugned notices would not survive. The petitions are therefore disposed of. Liberty to either side to revive in case of difficulty. Rule is discharged. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.

(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru* Top