ANSHIKA SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 9 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                       WRIT - C No. - 17371 of 2026

Anshika Singh
                                                          .....Petitioner(s)
                                  Versus

State Of Uttar Pradesh And 9 Others
                                                        .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)      : Devbrat      Mukherjee,      Siddharth
                                 Mukherjee
Counsel for Respondent(s)      : C.S.C., Harsh Kumar Mishra, Harshit
                                 Kumar        Srivastava,     Himanshu
                                 Srivastava, Madan Lal Srivastava

Court No. - 21
                  HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J.
                  HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.

1. Petitioner seeks quashing of notification dated 5th November, 2025
issued by the State Government on contention that substantial power of
policy making under rule 23(1) in Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals
(Concession) Rules, 2021 cannot be sub-delegated under rule 73. This has
been done by the notification under challenge. Therefore, it is to be
quashed and set aside. Mr. Devbrat Mukherjee, learned advocate appears
for petitioner.

2. Mr. Kartikeya Saran, learned advocate, Additional Advocate General
appears for State. He draws attention to section 26(2) and 28(3) in Mines
and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. He submits, the
State Government can delegate. There is requirement of the order to be
placed before the House. On earlier occasion (24th September, 2026), he
had handed over a set of documents with copies to Mr. Mukherjee, to
demonstrate that the Governor had passed the order of delegation, duly
notified and placed before the Houses. Thus, petitioner's challenge does
not bear substance. The writ petition be dismissed. Mr. Madan Lal
Srivastava, learned advocate appears for private respondents. He adopts
submissions made by Mr. Saran.

3. Mr. Mukherjee in reply submits, by section 15 in the Act there is power
conferred upon the State Government to make the rules. It follows,
                                                                WRIC No. 17371 of 2026
                                     2


promulgation of the rules was itself delegated legislation. There cannot be
further delegation by impugned notification. Hence, impugned
notification is sub-delegation, not permissible under the Act. More so
because declaration of mining area for auction is a policy decision. It
cannot be delegated. He relies on judgment of the Supreme Court in Goa
Foundation v. Union of India reported in (2014) 6 SCC 590, paragraph
81. Relied upon part of the paragraph is reproduced below.

              "81. We are of the considered opinion that it is for the State
              Government to decide as a matter of policy in what manner
              the leases of these mineral resources would be granted, but
              this decision has to be taken in accordance with the
              provisions of the MMDR Act and the Rules made thereunder
              and in consonance with the constitutional provisions and the
              decision taken by the State of Goa to grant a mining lease in
              a particular manner or to a particular party can be examined
              by way of judicial review by the Court......"

4. At the outset, our view is that point of contention for which petitioner
relies on Goa Foundation (supra) is not what was said by paragraph 81
therein. The Supreme Court said that it is for the State Government to
decide as a matter of policy in what manner minor minerals resources
would be granted, that the decision has to be taken in accordance with the
Act and applicable Rules and it is open to judicial review. We may add
that we are not called upon to decide whether by impugned notification
delegating the power to declare the area, is delegation of a policy making
decision. This is because, the rules giving the procedure are pursuant to
policy decision taken by the Government.

5. Rule 23(1) is reproduced below.

     "23. Declaration of area for e-tender/e-auction/e-tender-cum-e-auction
     lease-

     (1) The State Government may by general or special order declare the
     area or areas with geo-coordinates which may be leased out by e-
     tender/e-auction/e-tender-cum-e-auction."

Mr. Mukherjee's further submission has been that by impugned
notification, in effect the power under rule 23(4) was delegated. Rule
                                                              WRIC No. 17371 of 2026
                                   3


23(4) is reproduced below.

     23. (4) The District Officer shall get the area or areas declared under
     sub-rule (1), evaluated for quality and quantity of mineral for fixing
     minimum bid or offer by the Director, Geology and Mining, Uttar
     Pradesh or by an officer authorised by him before the date fixed for e-
     tender/e-auction/e-tender-cum-e-auction."

Also reproduced below are sections 26 and 28(3).

     "Delegation of powers.

     26. (1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official
     Gazette, direct that any power exercisable by it under this Act may, in
     relation to such matters and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be
     specified in the notification be exercisable also by -

     (a) Such officer or authority subordinate to the Central Government; or

     (b) Such State Government or such officer or authority subordinate to a
     State Government, as may be specified in the notification.

     (2) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
     direct that any power exercisable by it under this Act may, in relation to
     such matters and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified in
     the notification, be exercisable also by such officer or authority
     subordinate to the State Government as may be specified in the
     notification.

     (3) Any rules made by the Central government under this Act may confer
     powers and impose duties or authorise the conferring of powers and
     imposition of duties upon any State Government or any officer or
     authority subordinate thereto.

     ............

     28. (3) Every rule and every notification made by the State Government
     under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before
     each House of the State Legislature where it consists of two Houses, or
     where such Legislature consists one House, before that House."

6. We are also clear in our mind that by rule 23(1) there is provision of
the State Government having power to make general or special order
declaring the area or areas with geo-coordinates, which may be leased out
by, inter alia, e-tender. Rule 23(4) empowers the District Officer to do
                                                                                           WRIC No. 17371 of 2026
                                                                   4


                                    something more in respect of the area declared. As such, rule 23(4) is
                                    power granted to the District Officer. By impugned notification, the State
                                    Government has delegated the power to make general or special order to
                                    the District Officer with the condition of doing so, within the district over
                                    which the officer exercises jurisdiction. Thus, a power of the State
                                    Government provided by rule 23(1) has been delegated on procedure
                                    provided by rule 73. Substantial provisions in sections 26 and 28(3) have
                                    been complied with on aforesaid demonstration. In the circumstances,
                                    petitioner has not been able to make out case on merit.

                                    6. The writ petition is dismissed. The interim order stands vacated.

                                    September 30, 2026
                                    Mohini

                                                                                            (Arindam Sinha,J.)



                                                                                          (Prashant Kumar,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
MOHINI RAI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad