S.A. RASHEED versus DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY AND ANOTHER

S.A. RASHEED versus DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY AND ANOTHER

The writ petition filed by the appellant suffered from unexplained laches and delay, as no sufficient explanation or documentary evidence was provided for the eight-year gap; in addition, issuance of a writ after expiry of the lease period for which grant was made would not be just and proper.

Parties
Appellant: S.A. Rasheed; Respondents: Director of Mines and Geology and Another
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 April 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Karnataka High Court Judgment Dated 3.10.1991 in Wa.no. 1035 of 1991
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Laches and Delay, Quarrying Lease, Minor Mineral Concession, Writ Jurisdiction, Revocation of Grant

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S.A. Rasheed

Appellant

Director of Mines and Geology and Another

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Karnataka High Court Judgment Dated 3.10.1991 in Wa.no. 1035 of 1991

  1. 1 Whether unexplained delay and laches bar relief under Article 226
  2. 2 Whether the right to execution of lease deed survives after expiry of lease period
  3. 3 Effect of Rule 3(A) and Rule 9(2) on grant and execution of quarrying lease

Ratio Decidendi

The writ petition filed by the appellant suffered from unexplained laches and delay, as no sufficient explanation or documentary evidence was provided for the eight-year gap; in addition, issuance of a writ after expiry of the lease period for which grant was made would not be just and proper.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no costs.