High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Hardeep Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab & Others on 29 April, 2011

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardeep Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab & Others on 29 April, 2011
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH




                            Civil Writ Petition No.6948 of 2010 (O & M)
                                        Date of Decision: March 29, 2011



Hardeep Singh & others

                                                      .....PETITIONER(S)

                                 VERSUS



State of Punjab & others
                                                     .....RESPONDENT(S)
                             .     .      .



CORAM:             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA


PRESENT: -         Mr.   Gurvinder   Singh    Bhatti,

Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy
Advocate General, Punjab, for the
respondents.

                             .     .      .


AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

1.                 The     petitioners        seek    quashing       of

auction notice dated 19.3.2010 (Annexure P-23).

2. It is not in dispute that period

for which the mines were auctioned, has already

expired or is likely to expire in about one

month.

3. Be that as it may, learned counsel

for the petitioners contends that the petitioners
CWP No.6948 of 2010 [2]

were not allowed to operate mines/ quarries.

Representations were made vide Annexure P-9 to

P-14, however, no decision has been taken.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent-

State contends that the applications/

representations of the petitioners would be

considered by the respondents in terms of

provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation

& Development) Act, 1957 and Punjab Minor

Minerals Concession Rules, 1964, and a decision

would conveyed to the petitioners.

5. In view of the above, the petition

is disposed of. It is made clear that the

petitioners would be given hearing and

opportunity to place more documents on record in

support of their case whereafter the authorities

would take decision vide a speaking order.


                                                               (AJAI LAMBA)
March 29, 2011                                                    JUDGE
avin




1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?