Senior Geologist lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate quarry permit applications mandated for decision by the District Collector.

The petitioner, a cooperative society, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated May 8, 2024, passed by the Senior Geologist, Surat, which rejected their applications for a quarry permit

In a previous round of litigation (SCA No. 885 of 2023), the High Court had directed the authorities to reconsider the matter after providing the petitioner an opportunity to be heard

Despite this direction, the final decision was rendered by the Senior Geologist rather than the District Collector, and the petitioner alleged that the formation of a sub-committee by the Collector—as referred to in the impugned order—was illegal and lacked jurisdiction

1. Whether the Senior Geologist had the jurisdiction and authority to decide the quarry permit application when the Court had directed reconsideration by the concerned authority

2. Whether the formation of a sub-committee by the District Collector for such adjudication was consistent with the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Gujarat Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2017

The court's decision was governed by the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, and the Gujarat Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2017, which define the statutory authorities for granting mineral concessions

The court also relied on the procedural requirements of Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution regarding administrative fairness and adherence to judicial directions.

Furthermore, it applied the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change notification dated 24.11.2022 regarding environmental considerations in mining permits

The Court observed that in the previous litigation, the matter was specifically remanded for reconsideration by the appropriate authority after providing a personal hearing to the petitioner

However, the Court found that the Senior Geologist, Surat, passed the impugned order, which was "completely beyond the purview of the Geologist"

The Court reasoned that the statutory power and the Court's previous mandate required the District Collector to personally examine the issue. By delegating the decision to the Senior Geologist or relying on an improperly formed sub-committee, the authority failed to comply with the legal standards of administrative adjudication and the specific directions issued by the High Court in SCA No. 885 of 2023

The High Court remanded the matter back to the District Collector with a direction to reconsider the application in light of the Central Government notification dated 24.11.2022 and the Court's previous order. The Collector is ordered to grant the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to be heard and to pass a fresh decision in accordance with the law within three months from the receipt of the writ