ARUN TANDON,J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order passed by the Secretary, Department of Geology and Mining, U.P., Lucknow dated 31.03.2009 whereby the Revision filed by the present writ petitioner under rule 78 of the U.P. Mines & Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 has been rejected after recording a finding, that the allegation of illegal mining against Ashok Kumar Singh, respondent no. 4 in respect of lease granted in his favour on various plots within the jurisdiction of District Chandauli is not established from the material on the relevant of District Chandauli.
(2.) THE Court while hearing the writ petition found that there has been concealment of material facts, qua earlier writ petitions, filed, issuance of orders by the district authorities, and the affidavits filed before this Court by the State authorities as well as by Ashok Kumar Singh. The Court passed a detailed order on 29.05.2009 which noticed all the relevant facts on record. It is worthwhile to reproduce the order which is as below: "Facts stated in this writ petition and those which exist on records of the District-authorities qua dispute pertaining to the illegal mining by Ashok Kumar Singh, respondent no.4 in this writ petition, in whose favour the impugned order has been passed by the Secretary, Department of Geology and Mining, U.P. Civil Secretariat, Lucknow dated 30th March, 2009, present a very sorry State of affairs. This Court will not mince words while recording that at every stage of the proceedings culminating in the impugned order, there has been miss-statement of facts and concealment of orders, which exist on record, by all the authorities from the level of the Secretary, District Magistrates of Chandauli and Varanasi, Assistant Geophysicist/Mining Inspector, Varanasi/Chandauli as well as by private respondent no.4, Ashok Kumar Singh, with an apparent intention to confer illegal benefits upon respondent no.4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Afzal and Anr. vs. State of Haryana and Ors. reported in JT 1996 (1) 328 and Dhananjay Sharma vs. State of Haryana and Ors. reported in AIR 1995 SC 1795, has held that concealment of material facts/filing of false affidavit amounts to criminal contempt, inasmuch as it amounts to an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice. Writ petitions are decided by this Court on the basis of affidavits filed by the parties, if there is apparent concealment of facts in the counter affidavit filed by the State-authorities before this Court, which include the Secretary, District Magistrates and the Mining Inspector/Assistant Geophysicist, nothing can be worse. The purity of the river of justice has to be maintained at all cost and howsoever, high a person may be, if he pollutes the river, he has to be dealt with within the four corners of law, as situation so demands. The facts which are being recorded herein below by this Court will demonstrate that such situation has arisen in the facts of the present case and therefore, for unprecedented situations like one in hand, unprecedented solutions are required. This Court may first state the facts, in detail leading to the said situation. Respondent no.4, Ashok Kumar Singh was granted mining lease rights in respect of plot situate in Village Badgaavan, Tehsil Sakaldiha, District Chandauli for a period of three years under lease deed dated 19th February, 2007. Complaints were received against the respondent no.4 qua illegal mining having been effected by him. Enquiry was got conducted on complaints and reports dated 12th January, 2008, dated 21st January, 2008, dated 19th February, 2008 and dated 7th April, 2008 were submitted categorically stating that respondent has indulged in illegal mining qua a total area of 10378 cubic metres, he had used duplicate copy of MM-11 passes for illegal transportation of about 6,600 cubic metres of sand and that 3,778 cubic metres of sand was transported without MM-11 passes. On the said reports, the Director Geology and Mining U.P. Lucknow forwarded a letter dated 11th April, 2008 requiring the District Magistrate, Chandauli to take appropriate action in the matter for cancellation of the lease and for recovery of the royalty, penalty etc. The District Magistrate, Chandauli inturn vide his order dated 12th May, 2008 required the respondent no.4, Ashok Kumar Singh to deposit a total sum of Rs. 7,05,636/- towards penalty and royalty for the illegal mining carried out by him. He was directed to close the mining operations immediately and to deposit the money so demanded within 15 days, failing which the recovery certificate for the amount being recovered as arrears of land shall be issued and cancellation of the mining lease shall be directed. Respondent no.4 challenged the aforesaid order by means of the writ petition no. 27392 of 2008 before this Court. The writ petition was presented before the Court on 3rd June, 2008. It appears that the same was directed to be listed on 1st July, 2008 and on 1st July, 2008 nobody appeared to press the writ petition and therefore, the case was directed to be listed in ordinary course. The writ petition was filed after due service of notice upon the State-respondents bearing notice no. 23538 of 2008 issued by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel, High Court, Allahabad. No counter affidavit was filed in the writ petition. Ashok Kumar Singh, therefore made a listing application on 14th August, 2008 stating that the no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, therefore, the writ petition be listed at the earliest. Along with listing application, a supplementary affidavit was also filed wherein reference was made to the order issued by the Director, Geology and Mining appointing an Enquiry Committee vide order dated 27th June, 2008. The Enquiry Committee made spot inspection and submitted its report on 1st July, 2008. On the strength of facts stated in the supplementary affidavit, Ashok Kumar Singh was granted an interim order by the Division Bench of this Court on 12th September, 2008 whereby the recovery in terms of the order dated 12th May, 2008 was stayed. For ready reference the order is quoted below: "Although the impugned order dated 12.5.2008 is appeallable but it is based upon solitary reason that the petitioner has made excavation of sand outside his territory of lease. The petitioner has enclosed along with Supplementary Affidavit a report dated 1.7.2008 which shows that the petitioner has not made any excavation outside his areas because if the petitioner had done so he would have encroached the territory of Smt. Kusum Chandra and Smt. Kusum Chandra in such an even would have made complaint. It has been stated that no complaint has been made by Smt. Kusum Chandra. Further the report also refers to certain measurements made of the admitted areas and on that basis a conclusion has been arrived at that the petitioner Ashok Kumar Singh is not guilty of excavating outside his area. In the circumstances, pending filing counter affidavit which may be done within a month by the learned Standing Counsel operation of the impugned order dated 12.5.2008 will remain stayed." This interim order was passed in the presence of the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
(3.) TO keep the records sraight, it may be noted that none of the State-respondents have cared to file counter affidavit in the said writ petition till date.;