Sunder Singh Chauhan v. The State of Uttaranchal (cid:133) & Ors.

Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for respondent no. 3. 19th November, 2009 Hon(cid:146)ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition, inter alia has challenged the validity of a Government Order dated

17.10.2002 by which a monopoly has been created in favour of the State Corporation regarding mining activities in the State of Uttarakhand. This Government Order in fact was challenged in another writ petition being Writ Petition No. 48 (M/B) of 2003 before this Court which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 3.12.2003 and consequently in Special Appeal also the order of the learned Single Judge was upheld. The matter went to the Hon(cid:146)ble Apex Court which is reported in (2007) 11 SCC 641 - Doiwala Sehkari Shram Samvida Samiti Ltd. v. State of Uttaranchal and others. The validity of the order was upheld by the Apex Court as well. The core question to be decided in the writ petition was whether the State Government can change a policy by an executive feat. This has now been decided in favour of the State Government in as much as this has been held right upto the Hon(cid:146)ble Apex Court that under the present circumstances the policy could have been changed by an executive order. 2 The petitioner in this writ petition has primarily prayed for a writ of certiorari to quash order dated 17.10.2002 and

9.8.2005 which pertains to the aforesaid mining policy of the State Government, as it has already been referred above, the validity of which has been upheld right upto the Hon(cid:146)ble Apex Court. Therefore, there is no anomaly in the two orders. The writ petition, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is being dismissed. No order as to costs.

19.11.2009 Avneet (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)