Sanjay Sahgal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2341 of 2019 • Sanjay Sahgal S/o Shri Satpal Sahgal Aged About 52 Years R/o P-203, Pitrichhaya Apartment, Priyadarshini Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Director Geology And Mining, State Of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Collector Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. The Deputy Director Mining Administration Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. The Sub Divisional Officer Revenue, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6. The Tahsildar Tahsil Tilda, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri P.K. Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Ms. Richa Shukla, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 18/07/2019

1. Heard.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that initially a lease was granted to the petitioner from 27.11.2004 to 26.11.2014. Before the expiry of the lease, the

petitioner filed an application for renewal, however, the same having not been decided, there was a deemed rejection, consequently, initially an appeal was filed under the Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 under Section 77 clause

(2) before the Director Geology and Mining, Chhattisgarh (for short 'the Director'). The Director by an order dated 21.05.2015 remitted back the matter again to the Collector. The Collector by order dated 26.05.2016 rejected the application of the petitioner. Against such order an appeal was preferred before the Director and the Director again by order dated 13.01.2017 again remitted back the matter to the Collector for reconsideration. The Collector thereafter again passed the order dated 13.03.2018 (Annexure P-8) rejected the application. Against which order again an appeal was preferred by the petitioner on 19.04.2018. The petitioner only seeks redressal that the appeal preferred before the Director, may be adjudicated as early as possible as the issue pertains to 2013 itself.

3. Considering the limited prayer without any observation on merits, taking into the chequered history of the case, it is directed that the Director, Geology and Mining, Chhattisgarh shall decide the case of the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu