2025:JHHC:25846-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P (C) No.4460 of 2025 ----- M/s Manoj Stone Works a proprietorship concern represented through its proprietor Manoj Kumar Gond aged about 39 years son of Shyamlal Gond both having their office at village Sharkol, P.O. & P.S. Gokulpur, District Pakur. ....... … Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. Dy. Commissioner District cum Magistrate, Pakur, having its office at Collectorate, P.O. & P.S. Pakur, District- Pakur 3. Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, represented through its Secretary both having its office at T A Division Building (Ground Floor) H.Е.С. Dhurwa P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi. … Respondents ------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. P.A.S Pati, Advocate Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG-II Mr. Shray Mishra, AC to AG ------ Order No.04/Dated: 27st August, 2025 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following reliefs: “For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of mandamus seeking direction on Respondent No. 2 to forthwith proceed with the public hearing on the date already proposed within a time-bound manner.” 2. Reference may be made to the order dated 25.08.2025. 3. In pursuance to the order dated 25.08.2025 Mr. Manish Kumar, the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, the District Mining Officer, Pakur are present in the Court. 4. Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned AAG-II has submitted that miscommunication cannot be denied as instruction has been given the 2025:JHHC:25846-DB 2 District Mining Officer to Mr. Shray Mishra, the learned AC to the learned Advocate General with respect to the scheduled date fixed for public hearing which was on 21.08.2025. 5. The District Mining Officer, Pakur has stated before this Court that he has given instruction over telephone to Mr. Shray Mishra, the learned AC to the learned Advocate General without having any instruction from the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur or the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur and that is the reason the proper communication could not have been made to Mr. Shray Mishra, the learned AC to the learned Advocate General. 6. The District Mining Officer, Pakur has tendered unqualified apology in the affidavit which is to be filed today, a copy of which has been produced in the Court. 7. Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned AAG-II has submitted that one affidavit on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur is being filed today giving the explanation. 8. Let such affidavits be taken on record. 9. We have perused the said affidavit and considered the unqualified apology tendered therein at paragraph nos. 8 to 13 and the same are accepting with a caution that whenever any instruction is being sought by any of the State counsel on the direction of this Court, the proper instruction is to be given in future. 10. The same is the first instance and, as such, the aforesaid unqualified apology is being accepted. 2025:JHHC:25846-DB 3 11. So far as the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur is concerned, he has stated that the District Mining Officer, Pakur has not contacted anything with respect to the date fixed for public hearing on 21.08.2025. 12. It has been stated therein that the date was actually fixed on 21.08.2025 but the said power has been delegated to the District Land Acquisition Officer, Pakur and on 21.08.2025, since, the said District Land Acquisition Officer was at Ranchi due to some official work at the office of Chief Electoral Officer, Ranchi and, as such, the date for public hearing which was scheduled on 21.08.2025 has been deferred. 13. It has been stated therein that the date has been fixed for public hearing on 28.08.2025 which exercise is to be conducted by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Pakur on the basis of the power having been delegated by the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur. 14. Now, coming back to the prayer made in the present writ petition wherein a direction has been sought for upon the respondent no.2 to forthwith proceed with the public hearing on the date already proposed within a time-bound manner. 15. This Court, therefore, is of the view that since the date for public hearing has already been fixed on 28.08.2025 as has been stated by the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur which exercise is to be conducted by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Pakur on the basis of the power of delegation. 16. It has been contended by Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned AAG-II that the decision which is to be taken by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Pakur on conclusion of the public hearing with respect to the issue of Environmental Clearance will be without any prejudice to 2025:JHHC:25846-DB 4 any right with respect to issue of cancellation of lease as has been agitated in W.P(C) No.4352 of 2025 which is lying pending before this Court. 17. In view of the above, the present writ petition is being disposed of by recording such statement that the public hearing would be conducted on 28.08.2025 by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Pakur. 18. Let such exercise be completed by 28.08.2025 by the District Land Acquisition Officer in accordance with law. 19. With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 20. Pending I.As, if any, stands disposed of. 21. Let personal appearance of the Deputy Commissioner, Pakaur and the District Mining Officer, Pakur is hereby dispensed with. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Sudhir