Parking-Lot Applicant Gets Fresh Review Of Incidental Boulder-Extraction Exemption Bid, Not Approval: Meghalaya HC

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Divisional Forest Officer’s refusal to consider the Exemption Certificate on the ground that the conditions in the 28 July 2025 letter were not provided for in the Rules was sustainable.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition to the limited extent of directing the respondents to re-examine the matter in its entirety, taking into account the relevant materials, including the 3 October 2025 inspection report and the requirements for issuance of an Exemption Certificate.

It also directed

The exercise was to be completed within two months from the date of the order; the Court did not itself direct that the certificate be issued.

01Facts

The petitioner sought an Exemption Certificate for transporting boulders incidentally extracted during preparations for a parking lot at Amjowshrei, Ri-Bhoi District.

pp. 2–4

The State had granted permission and an exemption in January 2024, but the permission was subsequently put on hold and revoked.

pp. 2–4

By letter dated 28 July 2025, the Joint Secretary recalled the cancellation and permitted the certificate to be reconsidered subject to conditions.

pp. 2–4

The Divisional Forest Officer declined to issue the certificate, reasoning that the conditions in the letter were not prescribed under the Meghalaya Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016. A subsequent site-inspection report recorded deficiencies, and nearby residents had raised concerns.

pp. 2–4, 6

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Divisional Forest Officer’s refusal to consider the Exemption Certificate on the ground that the conditions in the 28 July 2025 letter were not provided for in the Rules was sustainable.

pp. 3, 5–6

ii.2. Whether the respondents should be directed to reconsider the petitioner’s application in light of the conditions, inspection findings, and other relevant requirements.

pp. 5–6

03Law Applied

The Court referred to Rule 3(ii) of the Meghalaya Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016, concerning an Exemption Certificate for transportation of minor minerals.

p. 3

It treated the 28 July 2025 letter as allowing conditional reconsideration—not as restoring unconditional permission—and held that consideration of the certificate must take account of the conditions specified by the respondents, particularly those in the 3 October 2025 inspection report, as well as other requirements relevant to issuance. No precedent was cited.

pp. 4–6

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the 28 July 2025 letter had cancelled the earlier revocation but made reconsideration subject to conditions.

pp. 5–6

The Divisional Forest Officer’s 25 August 2025 refusal relied only on the view that those conditions did not appear in the Rules; however, the inspection report had also identified site deficiencies relevant to incidental extraction. The Court therefore directed a fresh, comprehensive examination that considers the stated conditions and all other relevant requirements, rather than treating the absence of those conditions from the Rules as dispositive.

pp. 5–6