- (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order delivered by learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No.4399 of 2012 dated 17th March, 2015 whereby the petition preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and, therefore, the original petitioner has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.) Counsel for the appellant submitted that initially an auction notice was issued by the respondents on 24th November, 1999 for the auction of Sand Ghat, total 41 in number. This appellant applied for 03 Ghats viz Balu Ghat Nos.5, 10 and 11. The controversy has arisen for Balu Ghat No.11 only.
(3.) Counsel for the appellant submitted that the auction was held on 30th November, 1999. This appellant was the highest bidder so far as Balu Ghat Nos.5, 10 and 11 are concerned, but, we are concerned with Balu Ghat No.11 only, the necessary amount to be deposited with the respondents for Balu Ghat No.11, was at Rs.3,23,200/- which is a rent per year. The possession of the said Balu Ghat No.11 was handed over to the appellant on 20th December, 1999. Certain deposits were to be given before the actual work was to be started and, therefore, Rs.1,69,060/- was deposited as well as Kisan Vikash Patra of Rs.80,000/- was also deposited. Thereafter, Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation, Patna filed a revision application claiming that all the 04 auctions is illegal in nature under the Bihar Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 1972 enacted under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Ultimately, the auction was set aside vide order dated 24th December, 1999 by the Mines Commissioner (Annexure 1 to the memo of appeal)). The order of revision was also passed on 15th January, 2000 (Annexure 2 to the memo of appeal). So far Ghat Nos.5 and 10 are concerned, the amount was refunded for which there is no dispute in this matter. Nonetheless, for Ghat No.11, a writ petition was preferred by this appellant before the Hon'ble High Court bearing C.W.J.C. No.123 of 2000 in which status quo order was granted by the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 28th January, 2000 (Annexure-3 to the memo of appeal). Thereafter, on 25th January, 2000, all the 41 Ghats were given to the Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation. Thus, the deposits given by this appellant should have been refunded, because the auction was illegal and the application was preferred for getting a refund. The said application was rejected vide order at Annexure 6 to the memo of appeal, against which a revision case bearing Revision Case No.196 of 2002 was preferred before the Mines Commissioner who passed an order dated 7th January, 2005 and relegated the matter to the District Mining Officer, Bokaro. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro passed an order on 16th April, 2005 (Annexure 8 to the memo of appeal) and the refund application was rejected. Against this, Revision Application No.132 of 2011 was instituted by this appellant before the Additional Chief Secretary Cum Mines Commissioner, who also rejected the revision application preferred by this appellant and, therefore, W.P. (C) No.4399 of 2012 was preferred before this Court which was also dismissed by learned Single Judge vide order dated 17th March, 2015 with certain observations about adjustment of the amount of Kisan Vikash Patra valued at Rs.80000/-. This amount was directed to be adjusted against which this appeal has been preferred. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that this appellant was never in possession of Balu Ghat No.11. This matter has not been properly appreciated by the authorities below including by the learned Single Judge and not a single kilo gram of sand has been excavated by this appellant. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge.;