1 2025:CGHC:5805 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 155 of 2025 1 - M/s Sahil Interprises Through Its Proprietor Shri Sahil Gupta, S/o Shri Santosh Gupta, Age 34 Years, R/o Valmiki Chowk, Near Gupta Plastic Sanichi Padav Gondpara, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Forest Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chief Controller Forest Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Divisional Forest OfÏcer District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Collector District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Mining OfÏcer OfÏce Of The Collector (Branch Mining), District Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Director, Mining Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Block D, Second Floor, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Shubhansh Namdeo on behalf of Mr. Vivek Verma, Advocate For Respondent/s : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. A.G. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Order on Board 31.01.2025 1. The present petition has been filed for the following relief(s):- “(I) It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records concerning the case of the petitioner from 2 (ii) It is prayed before this Hon’ble Court be pleased to set aside / quash the impugned order passed by respondents dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-1). Order dated 13.11.2024 (Annexure P-2) and enquiry report dated 15.10.2024 (Annexure P-3) is in the interest of natural justice. (iii) It is prayed before this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to remitted back the above matter before the competent authority and directed to decide after proper opportunity of hearing before passing any order in the interest of justice. (iv) Any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petitioner may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed before this Court against the order dated 09.12.2024, 13.11.2024 & enquiry report dated 15.10.2024 whereby the respondent No. 5 i.e. Mining OfÏcer vide order dated 15.10.2024 initiated the enquiry against the petitioner without given an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without any intimation and also without following the provision of the Rule 70 of the Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rule 2015. Thereafter, on the basis of enquiry report, the respondent No. 3 without giving the show cause notice or any intimation, issued demand letter under Section 21 (5) of the Mines and Mineral Regulation Act 1957 and imposed penalty amount Rs. 1,00,24,520.66/- as per the enquiry conducted and in which there is a direction to recover the said amount from the petitioner. He prays for quashment of the said orders as the petitioner was not granted opportunity of hearing. 3. Learned State Counsel admitted the fact that show cause notice has not been issued to the petitioner in this case. 3 4. Given the submission made by the petitioner and looking to the facts that without following the norms of natural justice meaning thereby without any opportunity of hearing given to the petitioner, the respondent has passed the order and imposed penalty amount of Rs. 1,00,24,520.66/- against the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that, the impugned order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-1) and 13.11.2024 (Annexure P-2) so far as the order of penalty imposed upon the petitioner is concerned, are unsustainable and the same are therefore deserve to be and are accordingly set-aside/quashed. 5. The respondent/s are at liberty to issue show cause notice to the petitioner and an opportunity of hearing and thereafter pass an order under Section 21(5) of the Mines and Mineral Regulation Act 1957 on its own merits without prejudice to this Order. 6. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition in its present form stands allowed. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti