Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11768 (JK)

M/S CHOUDHARY POWER PROJECTS PVT LTD TH GOLDI MAHAJAN v. UT OF J AND K THADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY MINING DEPARTMENT JAMMU AND OTHERS

WP(C)/2721/2025 · 2025-09-27

Sanjay Dhar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case:- WP(C) No.2721/2025 M/S Choudhary Power Projects Pvt. Ltd. ….. Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankesh Chandel, Advocate Mr. T S Chib, Advocate Vs UT of J&K & Ors. .….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Advocate Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER (27.09.2025) 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition has sought a direction upon the respondents in reference to the representation dated 13.092025, for dredging/de- silting and removal of silt and muck from minor mineral blocks in village Mlhori Jagir, Tawi River, District Jammu to minor mineral block in village Top Manhasan, Nikki Tawi River, District Jammu & Makwal in Badi Tawi, District Jammu and to construct the ridge/barrage/bund on Tawi river shores in and around the areas where the minor mineral blocks allotted the petitioner’s company is located at his own expense and free of cost so as to enable the petitioner to undertake extraction of minor minerals Serial No. 50 2 WP(C) No.2721/2025 smoothly from these blocks, which have been already allotted in its favour by the respondents. 2. It has been submitted that in the context of the above, the petitioner has already moved a representation dated 13.09.2025 with the respondents but no decision has been taken by the respondents till date, as a result whereof, the petitioner is experiencing difficulty in extracting minor minerals from the blocks, which has been already allotted in its favour. 3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner would feel satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the recommendation dated 13.09.2025, within a specified time in accordance with law. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the aforesaid representation of the petitioner and take a decision thereon in accordance with law, most expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date a copy of this order is made available by the petitioner to respondent No.2. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 27.09.2025 Sneha