Summary:
The interim order, therefore, deserves to be vacated. The main contention of the petitioner is also to protect the state revenue. In the event of acceptance of the writ petition, the loss caused to the state exchequer, if any, can very well be compensated in monetary terms. “Having considered the entire issue from all aspects, we are of the view that continuance of the interim order is causing huge loss to the state revenue, therefore, it would not be appropriate to keep that in currency and more. The interim order, if remains in currency, would be causing huge loss to state revenue also.Earlier, in the year 2017, the petitioner had filed the present writ petition seeking an order to restrain the then state government headed by Samajwadi Party from granting mining lease in respect of minor minerals by any procedure other than the procedure of e-tendering prescribed under Chapter IV of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963.The petitioner had challenged the advertisement dated January 30, 2016, issued by the DM of Sonebhadra, who had invited tenders ignoring the previous rules prescribed by the state government..