m mm,m, . WWCC) 6\Q3 WW W 200% mm (Witt) mmm WWWifgétmn $a1‘faneméw Present : Mr. Raieev Shrivastave Ms. Sharmi!a Singhai, Asstt. Soliciter Genera! for U0!!respendent No.1. Mr. v.v.s. Murthy, Dy. AG. for the State/respondents No. 2 a 3. n ' ORAL ORDER (23.1. .2998) Dhirendra Mlshra, J r Grievance of the petitioner. in short, is that the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 applied f concession Rules‘ i960 befo application of the petitioner w s earlier on the point of time as he had submitted his application on 7.8.2006 . owever, the State Govt. exercising powers under Section 11(5) of the Mines nd Minerals (Development and Regulation) Aot, . counsel for the petitioner. l J... ,Il T' i 1 l ’V' l r grant of prospecting licence under the minerJ respondentNo. 2through respondentNo.3. The ’ Petitioner Radha Madhav Industries Private Limited. Vinage — Nayapara, Post Office Chakarbhata, District Bilaspur (CG) Through its Director R.K. Agrawal. S/o Late Ramkishorer Agarawai. aged 5.7 years, R/o Shri Ram Towers, Commercial Block-E, First Fioor, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) \_l_ersus Respondents 1. Union of indie, Through Secretary, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretarv! Department of Mineral Resources, D.K.$. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 3. The Coiiector. Kawardha District Kabirdham (0G) 4. ens. ’ispét Pm Limited through it's managing Director, Durg (CG) mw,m,m W mwcws‘w m ‘ 200% 3mm (W) WWW ~ l‘ WW§§QW §sai1=cmm 1957: considered an the ications received for prospecting licence of the referred area and rejected th application preferred by the petitioner whereas the application of the respond rrt No. 4 was recommended for approval to respondent No. 1 vide order ed 7.4.2007 of Annexure P/3. He further submits that he has already made re resentation before respondent No. ’l against the rejection of his applicat for prospecting licence as also against recommendation of the State ‘ovt'r for grant of prospecting licence to respondent No. 4. The representation is pending since 1.11.2007 before respondent No. 1 for consideration and no deci on has been taken tilt date. Ms. Shannila Sing ai. Asstt‘ Solicitor General appearing for U.O.l./respondent No.1 subm ts that the above representation submitted by the petitioner shall be decided in ccordance with law expeditiouslv. ' ln view of above s ssions. the instant petition is disposed of with a u i direction to respondent No.1 to decide the representation of the petitioner of /, Annexure P14 dated 1.11.20 ‘ expeditiously in accordance / wrthEv/m. stated “d 3 ‘0“."B :‘ége a l t i 0 f