Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7823 (CHH)

DEEPAK TRIPATHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/860/2025 · 2025-02-13

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:7648 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 860 of 2025 1 Deepak Tripathi S/o Ramesh Tripathi Aged About 34 Years R/o Belpan Pura, Pura District Bilaspur (Cg) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Mining And Geology, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (Cg) 2 The Director Mining And Geology Directorate Of Mining And Geology, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (Cg) 3 The Deputy Director (Mining) District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (Cg) 4 The Collector Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (Cg) 5 The Mining Officer Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (Cg) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vikram Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s)/ State : Shri Satish Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 2 13/02/2025 Heard. 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent No. 2 I.e. Director Mining & Geology to decide the pending appeal of the petitioner within a stipulated period. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal under Rule 77 (2) of the C.G. Minor Mineral Rules 2015 by which the petitioner is questioning order dated 06.11.2024 passed by respondent No. 3. By the order dated 06.11.2024, the application filed by the petitioner for extension of one year as per provisions of Rule 4 of C.G. Minor Mineral Ordinary Sand (Mining and Trade) Rules 2019 has been rejected. He is seeking a limited prayer, that the writ petition be disposed off with a direction to the concerned authority to decide the appeal within stipulated time. 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the appeal is still pending before Respondent No. 2 the same will be decide within a period 30 days. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Considering the submission made by the petitioner, as the statutory appeal is still pending before the respondent No. 2 which has been registered as appeal No. 68/2024, the respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the pending appeal of the petitioner within a period of 30 days from today. 6. The petitioner is directed to apprise the concerned authorities about the order of the Court. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.02.13 16:56:08 +0530 3