All these petitions are taken up for final disposal with consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

2 That Special Civil Application No.14354 of 2011 is taken up as a lead matter, as facts stated therein form basis of the contentions canvassed by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties in other matters also.

3 The petitioners have challenged in all these petitions the guidelines No.CGM/ML/QL/Disposal/11/3863 issued by the respondent No.2 – Commissioner of Geology and Mines Department, State of Gujarat, and prayed to dispose of the applications made by the petitioners in accordance with provisions contained in Mines and Minerals [Development & Regulation] Act, 1957, read with Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2010. The petitioners have also prayed to quash and set aside the public advertisement dated 21.08.2011 / 27.07.2011 issued by the respondent No.4.

4 It is the case of the petitioners that they are in the business of excavation of `ordinary sand' within the revenue limits of Panchmahals District. The petitioners were interested to obtain quarry lease on the river bed of `Panam', and accordingly, applications were submitted for allotment of land under the provisions contained in Mines and Mineral [development & Regulation] Act, 1957 [in short, `the Act, 1957’] read with Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2010 [in short, `the Rules, 2010’] framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 15 of the Act, 1957. The petitioners have also complied with the requisite requirements and all queries raised by the competent authority. However, the applications of the petitioners are not yet decided. That during the pendency of the applications of the petitioners before the competent authority, respondent No.3 had issued guidelines / instructions to all the Collectors in respect of applications received after 31.03.2010. As per clause [d] of the impugned guidelines, it has been decided by the respondent No.2 that in cases of sanctioned category area/low demand area, application will be invited after the same is put in public domain, and if multiple applications in the same category are received, the same shall be disposed of by way of draw system.

5 During the pendency of the applications preferred by the petitioners for quarry lease, respondent No.2 – Commissioner of Geology and Mines Department, State of Gujarat, issued impugned guidelines No.CGM/MLQL/Disposal/11/3863 dated 06.04.2011, and pursuant thereto public advertisement dated 21.08.2011 / 27.07.2011 came to be issued by the respondent No.4. As a result of the above instructions / guidelines and public notice, the applications submitted prior in time will become redundant, and procedures laid down in the instructions, if followed, would be arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It also places unreasonable restrictions on the right to carry trade etc., and therefore also, it is violative of Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India. In short, the prayer of the petitioners is to consider their applications strictly in accordance with provisions of Rule 8 of the Rules, 2010.

6 On behalf of the petitioners, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Rasesh Sanjanwala and learned advocate Mr. Mitul Shelat, canvassed submissions and learned advocates appearing for the respective petitioners in all other petitions have adopted such submissions.

6.1 Mr. Sanjanwala, learned Senior Advocate would contend that the subject controversy of the writ petitions is governed by the Mines and Minerals [Development and Regulation] Act, 1957 and the Rules made thereunder. That Rules known as Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2010, have direct bearing on various contentions raised against the decision of the respondents in not processing their applications for seeking grant of minor minerals / sand on the basis of first come first serve, and in some cases, such applications are rejected on the basis of circul