Honble YADAV, J. – Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 9.10.90 passed by Collector, Jaisalmer, Annx. 5 to the writ petition, in exercise of his power under Sec. 91 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act imposing penalty for constructing house over lease land granted to him as envisaged under Sec. 89(7) of the said Act. He further sought a relief for quashing notice issued in consequence thereof for his appearance in his court by Tehsildar, Jaisalmer, Anx. 8 to the writ petition.

(2). Brief facts leading up to filing of present writ petition are that the petitioner had applied for grant of mining lease for mineral masonary stone near village Badabagh Tehsil and District Jaisalmer for an area measuring 100 meters x 100 me- ters whereupon the Mining Engineer, Jodhpur granted a mining lease. A lease was executed between State and the petitioner on 20.4.90, a copy whereof is filed alongwith writ petition and marked as Anx. 1.

(3). A close scrutiny of terms and conditions stipulated in lease deed Anx. 1 to the writ petition reveals the liberties, powers and privileges of petitioner making him entitled in connection with any of the purposes mentioned in the lease deed to erect, construct, plant, dressing, floors, furnaces, coke ovens, brick kilns, workshops, stores, houses, bungalows, godowns, shed and other buildings and other works an conveniences of the like nature on or under the said land given to him on lease. An explanation under clause 3(ii) (b) is added in the lease-deed which reads thus :–

``3(ii)(b) – Permission for surface operation in a land not already in use :– Before using for surface operation any land which has not already been used for such operations, the Lessee/Lessees shall give to the Collector of the District two calender months previous notice in writing specifying the situation and the extent of the land proposed to be so used and the purpose for which the same is required and the said land shall not be so used if objection is issued by the Collector within two months after receipt by him of such notice unless the objection so stated shall on reference to the Government be annuled or waived.

(4). There are further stipulations in sub-clause (14) of Clause 4 of the mining lease, Anx. 1 to the writ petition, which reads thus :–

``Building erected by the lessee : – The lessee/lessees may erect on the area granted to him/them any building required for bonafide mining purposes and such building shall be the property of the Government after expiry of the lease.

(5). It is evident from the order passed by the respondent No.2, Anx. 5 to the writ petition, that Tehsildar, Jaisalmer initiated proceedings under Sec. 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act read with Section 89 of the said Act against raising of construction by petitioner over the lease land without permission of the Collector. It is evident from Anx. 5 to the writ petition that the Tehsildar, Jaisalmer in exercise of his power under sub-sec. (7) of Section 89 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act impo- sed penalty calculating the same at the rate of fifty times which on appeal before the Collector, Jaisalmer was reduced from fifty times to fifteen times.

(6). I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the materials available on record critically.

(7). An identical question came up for consideration before me in S .B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2875/1987 decided on 19.9.96, where in paragraph 10, it was held which reads thus :–

``10. Agrument of learned counsel for respondent Mr. R.L. Jangid gives an impression as if the validity of short term permit/lease Anx. 1 granted to the petitioner cannot be upheld without disobeying the provisions contemplated under sub-sec. (7) of Sec. 89 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act. Suffice it to say in this regard that the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act has been passed by the State Legislature while Act of 1957 has been passed by the Parliament. Assuming for sake of argument that t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document