IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5057 of 2008 GULABI KUER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner : Mr.Aditya Nr. Singh-I, Advocate Mr. Neeraj Kumar Singh,Advocate For the respondents : Mr. Baidya Nath Thakur, Junior Counsel to Standing Counsel-XVIII ------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan ------ Dated, the 8th August, 2008 By means of this public interest litigation, the petitioner seeks to assail the settlement of two blocks for mining operation on the ground that the said blocks are proximate to the village Dhaudharh, P.S. Sasaram, District-Rohtas. It is alleged that the lessees would be using dynamites and other methods for quarrying which may cause irreparable loss to the life and property of the villagers of Dhaudharh ( Muthiyapur) which is hardly 100 yards away from these two blocks. 2. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. They have denied the petitioner’s case that the village is at a distance of 100 yard from the quarries. According to the respondents, village Dhaudarh is about half kilometer away from the quarrying sites. It is - 2 - also stated that a Committee under the Chairmanship of Deputy Director, Mines & Geology, Patna visited the site and nobody raised any objection for the settlement being granted in respect of the two blocks. The District Forest Officer, who is head of the District Pollution Board, is said to have given ‘no objection’ and consequently tenders were invited for settlement of the two blocks. The two blocks are said to have been settled by open public auction which was done in the month of May, 2008. The highest bid for Block-A at Rs.9.01 crores and for Block B at Rs.11.01 crores has been accepted. 3. Having considered the counter affidavit, it appears to us that the writ petition is not pro bono publico. The village is at a distance of half kilometer from the quarrying sites. On earlier occasions also two blocks were settled and there was no objection from any quarter at that time. The District Pollution Board has also given ‘no objection’. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, liable to be dismissed and is dismissed. R.M. Lodha, CJ Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. Sunil