State of Rajasthan vs Sharwan Kumar Kumawat Etc. Etc.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 666

A. S. BOPANNA, M. M. SUNDRESH
State of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Sharwan Kumar Kumawat Etc. Etc. – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arpit Parkash, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Apurv S., Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Shobha Gupta, AOR Ms. Ankita Gupta, Adv. Ms. Tarjana Rai, Adv. Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh, AOR Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Singh, Adv. Mr. Ravish Singh, Adv. Mr. Avijeet Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ashish Mohan, Adv. Mrs. Ashish Mohan, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, AOR Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Adv. Ms. Rajshri Dubey, adv. Mr. H.B. Dubey, Adv. Mr. Amit P. Shahi, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Yadav, Adv. Mr. Anuj Bhandari, AOR Mr. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Mr. Rajat Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Disha Bhandari, Adv. Mrs. Anjali Doshi, Adv. Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, AOR Ms. Namita Choudhary, AOR

JUDGMENT :

M.M. Sundresh, J.

1. In all these appeals the Appellants seek to overturn the decision of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench declaring sub-rule (10) of Rule 4 and sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”) as unconstitutional.

2. Heard Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the Appellants and Ms. Shobha Gupta, learned Advocate-on-Record & Ms. Ankita Gupta, learned Advocate, appearing for the Respondents.

A VISIT TO THE RULES:

3. The Rules were brought into statute by the first appellant in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as “1957 Act”) for regulating the grant of quarry licenses, mining leases and other mineral concessions qua minor minerals. Chapter II of the Rules deals with grant of leases. Rule 7 speaks of preferential rights of certain persons. As per the said Rule, in existence prior to the amendment made on 28.01.2011, one applicant shall have

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 666

A. S. BOPANNA, M. M. SUNDRESHState of Rajasthan – AppellantVersusSharwan Kumar Kumawat Etc. Etc. – Respondent

Cases Referred (5)

A. S. BOPANNA, M. M. SUNDRESH
State of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Sharwan Kumar Kumawat Etc. Etc. – Respondent