Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 312 (UTT)

Subham Stone Crusher v. State of Uttarakhand

2016-07-05

U.C.DHYANI

body2016
JUDGMENT : By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps in pursuance of the order dated 27.07.2015, passed by District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar and the recovery citation dated 24.05.2015, issued by the Tehsildar Kiccha, Udham Singh Nagar. It is also prayed that Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital be directed to take a decision on the interim relief / stay application of the petitioner filed along with Appeal no. 55 of 2015-16, M/s Subham Stone Crusher vs State, pending before said authority. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the grounds taken up in the writ petition and the documents brought on record. 3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that Rule 13(2)(a) of the Uttarakhand Minor Minerals (Regulation of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2005 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’), as amended in the year 2011, provides that before passing any order, the District Magistrate is required to give 30 days’ notice to the parties concerned, but in the case in hand, time granted to the petitioner was not at all sufficient to reply the notice issued to him. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of fact that order impugned has been passed in violation of the Rule 13(2)(a) of the Rules, the same deserves to be set aside. 4. The statutory appeal of the petitioner against the order passed by the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar is pending before learned Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that even the stay / interim relief application filed along with the appeal has not been decided by the authority concerned. The only innocuous prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Commissioner, Kumon Division, Nainital may be directed to decide the stay / interim relief application of the petitioner filed along with appeal, at the earliest possible, in accordance with law, and till such time the effect and operation of the order dated 27.07.2015, passed by the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar and the recovery citation issued against the petitioner by the Tehsildar Kiccha be kept in abeyance. 5. 5. The innocuous prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed, inasmuch as, a similar order was passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.09.2013, in Writ Petition no. 2299 (M/S) of 2013. 6. The writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, by directing the Commissioner, Kumaon Mandal, Nainital to decide the pending stay / interim relief application of the petitioner filed along with appeal, at the earliest possible, in accordance with law. Till such stay / interim relief application of the petitioner is decided by the Commissioner, it is provided that the order dated 27.07.2015, passed by the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar and the recovery citation issued against the petitioner by the Tehsildar Kiccha shall be kept in abeyance. [Interim relief application no. 6750 of 2016 also stands disposed of.]