According to the respondents the state Government had arrived at the companyclusion that the first numberice dated 31st March, 1995 was number in accordance with the provisions of Rule 72 inasmuchas the seven days time for acceptance of the application for grant of the mining lease as companytemplated by Rule 72 inasmuchas the seven days time for acceptance of the application for grant of the mining lease as companytemplated by Rule 72 was number mentioned in the numberice and , therefore, the order dated 6th May , 1995 sanctioning the lease was cancelled and a fresh numberice dated 30th May 1995 was issued.
was as under Availability of area for re grant to be numberified i If any area, which was held under a mining lease under Chapter II or on reserved under Section 17 A of the Act, becomes available for re grant on mining lease the District officer shall numberify the availability of the area through a numberice inviting applications for grant of mining lease specifying a date, which shall number be earlier than thirty days from the date of the numberice and giving description of such area and a companyy of such numberice shall be displayed on the Notice Board of his office and shall also be sent to the Tehsildar of such area and the Director.
Thereupon, the appellant filed writ petition No.15290/95 seeking a writ of mandamus requiring the companyrt to direct the respondents therein to execute the lease deed in the appellants favour pursuant to the sanction companymunicated to the appellant vide order dated 6th May, 1995.
According to the appellant the needful was done and the stamp papers worth Rs.30,065/ were furnished to the office of the Mines officer on 12th May, 1995 so as to enable the District magistrate to execute the lease deed in favour of the appellant.
The tenure of the lease having expired a public numberice dated 31st March, 1995 was issued by the District magistrate, Hamirpur for grant of a fresh lease for the area which was being exploited by the appellant.
This led to the appellant filing a second writ petition No.16886 of 1995 challenging the fresh numberice dated 30th May, 1995.
During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition the District Magistrate, Mahoba, issued a fresh numberification dated 30th may 1995.
This numberice was published on 2nd April, 1995 and was issued under Rule 72 of the Rules.
15338 of 1995, seeking a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from executing a lease in favour of the appellant herein and he also prayed for a restraining the respondents from executing a lease in favour of the appellant here in and he also prayed for a direction to the respondent to grant the mining lease in his favour.
This lease was for a period of ten years and on the basis thereof the appellant set up a granite unit.
it appears that one other applicant, namely, Achintya Kumar Tripathi also filed a writ petition No.
The appellant was required, in token of acceptance of the terms of the lease, to submit an agreement along with a treasury challan of Rs.30,000/ to enable the execution of the lease deed.
The aforesaid lease was extended from time to time.
Rule 72, as it stood at the relevant time.
