1 2026:CGHC:13360 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1225 of 2026 Ravi Vidhani S/o Late Daulatram Vidhani Aged About 45 Years R/o Gurunanak Chowk, Torwa, Police Station Torwa, Tahsil Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Mineral Re- source, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector (Mining Branch) Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - The Deputy Director (Mining Administration) Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Bhawna Netam, Adv. on behalf of Push- pendra Kumar Patel, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board 19-3-2026 1 The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.03.20 17:23:31 +0530 2 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call for the entire record relating to the case of the Petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to set-aside / quash the impugned order dated 25.07.2025 (Ann P-1) issued by the Respondent No.02 and further the Respondent No.02 be directed to allow the application dated 28.04.2025 and grant extension of lease for further period of 05 years, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the Petitioner, in the interest of justice. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent authorities had granted Lime Stone Lease in favour of father of the petitioner Daulat Ram Vidhani for a period of 30 days ( i.e. 21- 4-1996 to 20-4-2026) for extracting Lime and Minerals from government land bearing Khasra Survey No. 572/1, Rakba 1.618 hectare (4.00 acre). During existence of said lease period, father of the petitioner died on 2-9-2023. The petitioner moved an application for transfer of the lease in his favour before the Collector, Bilaspur, which was allowed by the Collector vide order (Annexure P-4) dated 3-10-2024. He further submits that, the petitioner submitted an application on 28-4-2025 before the respondent no. 2/Collector, Bilaspur for renewal of lease for a further period of 5 years, but the same has been rejected vide Annexure P-1 dated 25-7-2025, stating therein that, the 3 application has not been filed by the petitioner within six months from the amendment dated 26-6-2020 in CG. Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 (hence forth referred to as ‘Rules, 2015’) which is completely illegal. Hence, he prays that, this petition may be admitted for hearing. 3 In reply, learned State counsel submit that, earlier lease was granted for 30 years, but the Rule of 2015 was amended on 26- 6-2020, whereby Rule 38(A) of the CG Minor Mineral Rules, 2015 was amended and period of lease was reduced from 30 years to maximum 5 years. It has also been provided in the proviso that, for renewal of lease, mandatory deposit of amount Rs. 20,000/- has to be made within 6 months from the date of above amendment, but in the instant case, the petitioner has filed application for extension/renewal of lease after 5 years from the date of amendment in aforesaid rules. He further submits that, if the petitioner is aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Collector, then he may file appeal under Rule 77(2) of the Rule, 2015. Thus, since there is efficacious remedy available to the petitioner, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. 4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5 Having considered the contention of learned counsel for both the parties and further considering the fact that there is efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner to file appeal under 4 Rule 77(2) of the Rules, 2015, therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. 6 In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file appeal before the concerned authority under aforesaid provision. 7 Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge pathak