Back
DINESH MEHTA
Rahul Vyas S/o Shri Prakash Bhai Vyas – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. All these writ petitions involve identical facts and grounds and therefore, are being decided conjointly.
2. For the purpose of clarity and convenience, the facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10181/2024 titled as Rahul Vyas vs. State of Rajasthan and Others are being taken into consideration.
3. The petitioner submitted an application for grant of mining lease on 18.06.2013 for the area ad-measuring 4.5 hectares near Village Parewar, Tehsil & District Jaisalmer for mineral Silica Sand. Petitioner’s application was processed and a Letter of Intent (for short ‘LOI’) dated 28.01.2014 came to be issued in his favour.
4. On 28.08.2015, the respondent no. 4-Additional Director (Mines) sent a communication to the petitioner to produce Environmental Clearance as per the Notification dated 07.10.2014 issued by the Central Government so also to deposit FDR of Rs. 75,000/-. Before needful could be done, the mineral-Silica Sand [which was major mineral and covered by the provisions of The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MMDR’)] came to be declared as ‘minor mineral’ and thus, governed by Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rul
Compliance with financial obligations under the MMCR is essential for the validity of mining lease applications, and failure to meet these conditions justifies cancellation of the LOI.
The State cannot take advantage of its own wrong, and a wrongdoer should not be permitted to make a profit out of their own wrong.
A mining lease holder must obtain Environmental Clearance before commencing operations, and failure to do so precludes any extension of the lease period under the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession R....
The court emphasized the importance of considering extenuating circumstances, such as the petitioner's medical condition, and held that arbitrary decisions without due consideration are not permissib....
Rule 18 (21) of Rules, 1986, which provide for alternate consequences of breach of conditions of lease.
No lapsing of a mining lease occurs where operations are statutorily restrained until requisite environmental clearances are obtained, making provisions inapplicable until such clearances are availab....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's interpretation and application of Rule 29 of the Gujarat Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 2017, in directing the government to issue an....
Mining Lease approvals were revoked due to the petitioners' failure to comply with statutory requirements, rendering prior approvals void.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
