Sangram Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Sangram Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jun 17, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053516

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1053516
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Jun 17, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sangram Singh

Advocate Shri. Shobhitaditya

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....of some mines has filed this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india for issuing appropriate writ directing the respondent to issue the transit pass to the petitioner as per terms and conditions of the quarry lease agreement (ann. p.1).in compliance of the provision of rule 30 (14) of m.p.minot mineral rules, 1996 and rule 5 (2) of the m.p.minerals (prevention of illegal mining, transportation and storage).rules, 2006. subsequent to filing this petition vide order dated 7.2.2013, the following interim order was passed : “keeping in view the aforesaid, as an interim measure it is directed that the sand extracted by the petitioner laying in the mining area be permitted to be transported subject to paying royalty tax as per rules.” it is apparent from the aforesaid agreement (ann. p.1) that alleged lease of the petitioner has been expired on 31.3.2013 and thereafter there is nothing to consider in the present petition. in view of this on making query from the petitioner's counsel that under such situation how this petition could be continued then he said that for further extension of such lease for two years he has filed his application/ representation in the office of the licensing authority but no order has been passed till today. he has also filed some writ petition before this court and the same has been disposed of with some direction to the licensing authority and in such 2 premises subject to consideration of the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, he seeks permission to withdraw this petition as he does not want to prosecute further. considering aforesaid prayer, this petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed. however, it is observed that respondent/ licensing authority shall consider the above mentioned representation of the petitioner without influencing from any observation made in this order.c.c. as per rules. (u. c.maheshwari) judge k

Full Judgment

1 Writ Petition No.362/13.

17.6.2013 .

Shri Shobhitaditya, learned counsel for the Petitioner.

Shri S.K.Dwivedi, learned G.A.for the respondent/ State.

Petitioner/ Licensee of some Mines has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ directing the respondent to issue the transit pass to the petitioner as per terms and conditions of the quarry lease agreement (Ann.

P.1).in compliance of the provision of Rule 30 (14) of M.P.Minot Mineral Rules, 1996 and Rule 5 (2) of the M.P.Minerals (Prevention of illegal mining, transportation and storage).Rules, 2006.

Subsequent to filing this petition vide order dated 7.2.2013, the following interim order was passed : “Keeping in view the aforesaid, as an interim measure it is directed that the sand extracted by the petitioner laying in the mining area be permitted to be transported subject to paying royalty tax as per rules.”

It is apparent from the aforesaid agreement (Ann.

P.1) that alleged lease of the petitioner has been expired on 31.3.2013 and thereafter there is nothing to consider in the present petition.

In view of this on making query from the petitioner's counsel that under such situation how this petition could be continued then he said that for further extension of such lease for two years he has filed his application/ representation in the office of the Licensing Authority but no order has been passed till today.

He has also filed some writ petition before this Court and the same has been disposed of with some direction to the Licensing Authority and in such 2 premises subject to consideration of the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, he seeks permission to withdraw this petition as he does not want to prosecute further.

Considering aforesaid prayer, this petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed.

However, it is observed that respondent/ Licensing Authority shall consider the above mentioned representation of the petitioner without influencing from any observation made in this order.C.C.

as per rules.

(U.

C.Maheshwari) Judge k

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Sangram Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education