Gaukaran Paikara v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No.2279 of 2017 1.

Gaukaran Paikara S/o Laharam Paikra, Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Medh, Tahsil & District Baloda Bazar Civil & Revenue District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

2. Vijay Sahu, S/o Deviram Sahu, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Medh, Tahsil & District Baloda Bazar Civil & Revenue District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

3. Kalyan Paikra S/o Bedram Paikra, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Medh, Tahsil & District Baloda Bazar Civil & Revenue District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh). ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Mineral Resources, Secretariat Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipr, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector, (Mineral Branch) Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

3. Gram Panchayat Medh, Through Its Gram Sachiv, Tahsil & District Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh.

4. Lafarge India Pvt. Ltd. Sonadih Cement Plant, Through Its Assistant General Manager (Mines), PO Raseda, Via Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh.

5. Ghanaram Jagat, S/o Late Shri Mahaveer Jagat, Aged About 37 Years Sarpanch R/o Village Medh, Tahsil & District Baloda Bazar Civil & Revenue District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

--- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Advocate For State :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 24/08/2017 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that respondent No.3-Gram Panchayat, Medh has granted 'No Objection

Certificate' in favour of the respondent No.4- Lafarge India Private Limited, Sonadih Cement Plant with effect that the gram panchayat has no objection in granting minning lease for extraction of limestone against which, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioners. (2) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. (3) Be that as it may, the petitioners are directed to file representation before Sub-Divisional Officer, who is controlling authority. If such representation is filed by the petitioners before the Sub-Divisional Officer and in that event Sub-Divisional Officer shall consider and take a decision on the same after hearing of the parties expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with representation of the petitioners.

(4) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-