HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 30647 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has challenged the impugned show cause notice dated 12.06.2023 passed by the respondent no.3-District Magistrate/Collector, Sonbhadra and order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the respondent no.2-Commissioner, Vindhyachal Division,Mirzapur. 3. The Appellate Authority by the impugned order has held that appeal of the petitioner is not maintainable being against an interlocutory order, which is a show cause notice dated 12.06.2023, and thereafter, he has remanded the matter to the authority concerned. 4. We find that the petitioner has preferred an appeal against the show cause notice dated 12.06.2023 by which the petitioner was asked to submit show cause as to why he may not be held liable for doing illegal mining of 300 cubic meter of Dolo Stone (Bolder), and why the royalty and penalty may not be imposed upon him under Rule 60 (2) of U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 2021. 5. The petitioner has preferred the appeal against the said show cause notice and we find that the Appellate Authority in deciding the Appeal No.1103 of 2024 has rightly concluded that the appeal is against the show cause notice, and the petitioner has liberty to rebut the averments made in the show cause notice by filing necessary evidence, and at this stage, the appeal against the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shailesh Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Arun Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) show cause notice is not maintainable. 6. The finding returned by the Appellate Authority by order dated 19.06.2025 is based upon sound principles of law as the petitioner has preferred the appeal only against a show cause notice and the petitioner has a liberty to rebut the allegations made in the show cause notice by filing his reply and necessary evidence that he did not conduct any illegal mining operation. 7. Accordingly, we find that the Appellate Authority has rightly held that the appeal of the petitioner is not maintainable, and has directed the respondent no.3-District Magistrate/ Collector, Sonbhadra to take a decision in respect of show cause notice dated 12.06.2023 against the petitioner. 8. Thus, for the reasons given above, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. Consequently, writ petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs. September 11, 2025 NS WRIC No. 30647 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad