Palok Basu, J. - (1.) Undisputedly, policy decisions relating to matters which involve betterment of the polity and of the masses are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the respective Governments, subject to Judicial scrutiny if the policy is challenged on the ground of contravening fundamental rights or disturbing the basic structure of the governance through the constitutional provisions, whether or not the policy decision sought to be conveyed through G. O. dated 16.3.1999 issued by the State of U. P. conforms with the directive principles and the fundamental rights of citizens enumerated under the Constitution are the two basic issues raised by the petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions. The Government Order dated 16.3.99 which is under challenge, has been issued by the State of U. P. in exercise of power conferred by the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules. 1963 (in short. M.M.C. Rules) which have been framed in pursuance of the provisions contained under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Dvelopment) Act. 1957. Section 15 of the said Act authorises the State Government to make Rules in respect of Mines and Minerals vide subsection 1-A. Clause (E).
(2.) When the writ petition was filed, the arguments were advanced as a result of which counter-affidavit was called. In due course of time, the other petitions in the bunch came to be filed and in some of them counter-affidavits were again called which have been filed to which rejoinder-affidavits have also been filed.
(3.) As prayed by the learned counsel for the parties, this bunch of the writ petitions was taken up on priority basis under the order of the Chief Justice because practically whole length and breadth of the State is covered by the State Notification dated 16.3.1999 in so far as the mode, method and procedure of auctioning the mining rights with regard to minor minerals is concerned.;