- (1.) A lease for minor minerals is granted either under Chapter II or Chapter IV of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1963). Prior to 30th May, 2012, mining leases were being granted under Chapter II. The State Government issued a Government Order dated 31st May, 2012 under Rule 23 by which it was decided to grant mining lease under Chapter IV. Chapter IV of the Rules of 1963 provide that a lease could be granted by way of auction, auction-cum-tender and by tender process.
(2.) In furtherance of the Government Order dated 31st May, 2012, the State Government issued a Government Order dated 9th June, 2014 and 8th July, 2014 giving guidelines for issuing a mining lease through e-tendering process. Paragraph 8 and 13 of the Government Order dated 8th July, 2014 stipulated that the lessee was required to obtain an environmental clearance certificate before a lease could be granted. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the issuance of these government orders, filed the present writ petition praying for the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Government Order dated 9.6.2014 (Annexure No.11) and Government Order dated 8.7.2014 (Annexure No.12) to the writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to issue notice for settlement of the mining lease in accordance with direction given by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deepak Kumar , M.C. Mehta and Nar Narayan Mishra as well as Pravesh Kumar passed by Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court. (iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case. (iv) Award the cost of the writ petition throughout in favour of the petitioner."
(3.) The petitioner contended that he is a holder of a mining lease and is also a prospective bidder and has a locus standi to question the intention of the State Government in directing the lessee to obtain an environmental clearance certificate. The petitioner contended that it is the duty of the State Government to obtain an environmental clearance certificate prior to advertising an area in question for settling the lease and to this extent, the directions given in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Deepak Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana and others, 2012 4 SCC 629 had not been complied with.;