Kalpnath Singh vs Udai Nath & Ors

areas, namely, Mokalpur, Khand-I, Plot No.349 measuring about 30 acres and furnished the documents mentioned in the public notice. By a notification dated 15.02.2007, Rules 6(1)(g) was introduced in the Rules requiring that in case the area applied for is having annual lease amount or dead rent, as the case may be, of rupees two lacs or more, then the applicant shall also furnish `No Objection Certificate' from the authorities mentioned therein. The Collector, Varanasi, issued a notice dated 02.04.2007 to all the applicants including the appellant and the respondent No.1 to submit `No Objection Certificate' by 12.05.2007. While the respondent No.1 submitted `No Objection Certificate' beyond the time stipulated in the notice of the District Magistrate, the appellant did not submit the `No Objection Certificate'. Thereafter, the Mine Supervisor, Varanasi, submitted a verification report on the merits of the four applicants and in this verification report inter-alia stated that all the four applications were complete and have been received on the same date and therefore their comparative preference will have to be determined under Rule 9(2) (e) of the Rules and on such determination the appellant, who has a better financial status than the respondent No.1 and who also has experience of mining work and no other candidate had such experience in mining work, had to be given preference for grant of said mining lease. On 03.08.2007 the District Magistrate, Varanasi, sent the recommendations of the Mine Supervisor, Varanasi, to the State Government for grant of the mining lease for excavation of the sand area in favour of the appellant. On 21.09.2007, the State Government granted permission to the District Magistrate to execute lease in favour of the appellant for a period of 3 years for 30 acres in village Mokalpur, Khand-I, Plot No.349 subject to completion of all formalities stipulated in the amendment to the Rules.

4. Aggrieved, the respondent No.1 filed Writ Petition No.49158 of 2007 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the Allahabad High Court and contended inter-alia that he belongs to the Nishad community, which is a Socially Educationally Backward Class, and under Rule 9(2)(e) of the Rules was entitled to preference in respect of mining lease of sand exclusively found in the river bed and that the appellant did not submit `No Objection Certificate' in accordance with the amended Rule 6(1)(g) of the Rules by 12.05.2007 as stipulated in the notice dated 02.04.2007 of the District Magistrate and therefore his application was incomplete. The High Court accepted the contentions of the respondent No.1 and quashed the order dated 21.09.2007 of the State Government granting permission as well as the recommendation dated 03.08.2007 of the District Magistrate for grant of mining lease of the area in favour of the appellant and directed the District Magistrate, Varanasi to grant the mining lease of the area in favour of respondent No.1 as per his entitlement under Rule 9(2)(e) of the Rules.

13. In the result, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 21.05.2008 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.49158 of 2007. No costs.