Back
2023 Supreme(Raj) 658
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
NUPUR BHATI, J.
Babulal Balai (through LRs) - Petitioner
Versus
State and Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1344 Of 2015 Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1342 Of 2015, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1343 Of 2015
Decided On : 14-08-2023
For the Petitioner: Mr. R. M. Lodha, Mr. Mahaveer Pareek.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vikas Balia with Mr. DPS Charan, Mr. DS Jasol.
Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226, 227 - Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1977 - Rule 29 - Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 - Rule 23(2) - Claiming reliefs - Allotment of mining lease - Applications for grant of Rent - Held, Court observes that after promulgation of Rules of 2017, Rule 89 states that all pending applications under old rules shall stand rejected except which are saved by Rule 4 and 5 of Rules of 2017 and it is apparent from reading of Rule 4 and 5 of Rules of 2017 that petitioners's case does not fall under saving clause of aforementioned rules - Therefore, when there were no applications of petitioners pending before respondents for allotment of mining lease in question, then there is no occasion for respondent to grant mining lease in favour of petitioners - Applications dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Though the matters has been listed in the ‘orders’ category, however, at the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, the matters were heard finally today itself.
2. These petitions have been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, claiming following reliefs:
SBCWP 1344/2015
“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by a writ of mandamus/certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction:-
(i) The order dated 17.11.2014 (Anx. 20) passed by the respondent No.2 as well as the order dated 17.7.2012 (Anx.19) passed by the Additional Director, Mines, Jodhpur may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(ii) That the order dated 31.8.1987 (Annexure-4) and 31.08.2009 (Annexure-17) may also be quashed and set aside and the allotment made in favour of respondent no.4 may be quashed.
(iii) The respondent No.4 may be directed to consider only the applications submitted on 28.12.1983 pursuant to the notification dated 30.11.1983(Annexure-1) and to grant Quarry No. 577 in Sodan ki Dhani to the petitioner on preferential basis excluding the other applicants since they are not before this Hon'ble Court;
(iv) any other appropriate order or direction that may be considered just & proper in the facts & circumstances of the case; and
(v) allow the costs of the writ petition to the petitioner.”
SBCWP 1342/2015
“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by a writ of mandamus/certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction:-(i)The order dated 17.11.2014 (Anx. 19) passed by the respondent No.2 may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(ii) That the order dated 31.8.1987 (Annexure-4) and 31.08.2009 (Annexure-17) may also be quashed and set aside and the allotment made in favour of respondent no.4 may be quashed.
(iii) The respondent No.3 may be directed to consider only the applications submitted on 28.12.1983 pursuant to the notification dated 30.11.1983 (Annexure-1) and to grant Quarry No. 578 in Sodan ki Dhani to the petitioner on preferential basis excluding the other applicants since they are not before this Hon'ble Court; (iv) any other appropriate order or direction that may be considered just & proper in the facts & circumstances of the case; and
(v) allow the costs of the writ petition to the petitioner.”
SBCWP 1343/2015
“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by a writ of mandamus/certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction:-
(i) The order dated 17.11.2014 (Anx. 20) passed by the respondent No.2 as well as the order dated 17.7.2012 (Anx.19) passed by the Additional Director, Mines, Jodhpur may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(ii) That the order dated 31.8.1987 (Annexure-4) and 31.08.2009 (Annexure-17) may also be quashed and set aside and the allotment made in favour of respondent no.4 may be quashed.
(iii) The respondent No.4 may be directed to consider only the applications submitted on 28.12.1983 pursuant to the notification dated 30.11.1983 (Annexure-1) and to grant Quarry No. 577 in Sodan ki Dhani to the petitioner on preferential basis excluding the other applicants since they are not before this Hon'ble Court;
(iv) any other appropriate order or direction that may be considered just & proper in the facts & circumstances of the case; and
(v) allow the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner.”
3. Since, common questions of facts and law are involved in these matters, therefore, they are being decided by this common order. For the purpose of deciding this bunch of matters, facts of SBCWP No. 1344/2015 are being taken into consideration.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the Mining Engineer, Jodhpur delineated Sodan ki Dhani Sandstone boundary in the year 1961 and subsequently, the quarry area map was extended in the year 1983 dated 30.11.1983. A notification was issued by the Mining Engineer, Jodhpur, inviting a
