District Magistrate's illegal mining punishment order quashed for addressing wrong plot number in final decision

The Allahabad HC quashed a District Magistrate's order regarding illegal mining punishment due to fundamental procedural errors. The show cause notice dated 31.5.2022 concerned illegal excavation over Plot No. 824 Kha, but the subsequent impugned order dated 20.6.2022 addressed Plot No. 421 Kha instead. The court found the show cause notice was badly drafted and incomplete, while the final order was inherently misconceived as it went beyond the scope of the original notice. Both the show cause notice and the order were set aside, and the writ petition was allowed.

---

---

Issues involved: Show cause notice discrepancy leading to illegal mining punishment on wrong plot.

Summary:
The High Court heard the petitioner's counsel and the Chief Standing Counsel for the State regarding a show cause notice issued by the District Magistrate, Sonebhadra, related to illegal mining over Plot No. 824 Kha. The petitioner argued that the final order dealt with illegal mining over Plot No. 421 Kha, which was not the subject matter of the show cause notice. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the petitioner contended that if the show cause notice is defective, the consequential proceedings cannot stand. The Chief Standing Counsel argued that the order was correctly passed concerning Plot No. 421 Kha, as the petitioner participated in the proceedings and provided explanations.

The petitioner relied on various Supreme Court judgments emphasizing the importance of the grounds mentioned in the show cause notice and the limitations on authorities to go beyond the notice in subsequent orders. The Court noted that the show cause notice was for Plot No. 824 Kha but the order was passed for Plot No. 421 Kha, indicating a discrepancy. Consequently, the Court quashed the show cause notice and the order, stating that they were inherently misconceived and went beyond the scope of the notice. The District Magistrate was given the option to initiate proceedings afresh in accordance with the law.

In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed based on the discrepancies between the show cause notice and the subsequent order, leading to the quashing of both documents.

---