Mr. S.J. Vazifdar, C.J. (Oral) - The petitioner had challenged Rules 76 to 80 of the Haryana Minor Mineral Concession, Stocking, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of Illegal Mining Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

2. The petitioner had earlier filed CWP-12334-2016 challenging an undated communication (Annexure P-6) from the Director General, Mines and Geology, Haryana rejecting their request for waiving the payment of ten percent of the amount of the monthly installments for the Mines and Mineral Development, Restoration and Rehabilitation Fund (hereinafter referred to as the Fund) and for refunding the installments already paid for the earlier months. The petitioner was advised to deposit the balance amounts as required.

That writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.08.2016. The order and judgement dated 24.08.2016 reads as under:-

“After arguing for some time, a prayer was made to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one only to challenge Rules 76 to 80 of the Haryana Minor Mineral Concession, Stocking, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of Illegal Mining Rules, 2012. On the basis of the said Rules, as they stand the terms and conditions of the auction, LoI and the contract entered into between the parties, the petitioner is bound to pay the amounts to the Fund. Thus, that aspect cannot be reagitated in the fresh petition.

2. The liberty is granted to challenge the Rules. It is further clarified that even in the event of the Rules being challenged successfully, the matter may not end there. It would have to be considered whether in that event the respondents would be bound to have the entire auction process annulled and call for fresh bids in order to give all prospective bidders an opportunity of bidding under the fresh terms of auction.

3. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.”

3. We, therefore, did not permit the petitioner to challenge the communication on merits. The petitioner was confined to a challenge to the said Rules. The validity of the communication would depend upon the outcome of the challenge to the said Rules.

4. The Rules, which have been challenged, read as under:-

“Chapter – 12

Mines and Mineral Development, Restoration and Rehabilitation Fund

76. Establishment of the Mines and Mineral Development, Restoration and Rehabilitation Fund – A fund known as the ‘Mines & Mineral Development, Restoration & Rehabilitation Fund’ shall be established under Public Account in the State of Haryana under the administrative control of the Department to which rehabilitation charges payable under clause (i) of sub rule (1A) of section 15 of the Act shall be credited in order to meet the following objectives:-

(i) funding of the restoration or reclamation or rehabilitation works in the sites affected by mining operations;

(ii) provision of common facilities for the benefit of community in and around areas where mining activities are undertaken;

(iii) development of infrastructure facilities for orderly growth of the mining operations and allied activities e.g. roads, stone crusher estates, water supply etc.;

(iv) funding of the studies commissioned or activities related to the mining sector e.g. survey, exploration and prospecting of minerals, procurement of equipment and machinery required to support such activities;

(v) education, awareness and training of the mineral concession holders and the staff of the Department through field visits and exposure to the best mining practices;

(vi) funding of expenditure incurred on implementation of any scheme of incentives that the state government may frame for recognition and awards for scientific mining undertaken with highest regard to mineral conservation, rehabilitation measures along with environmental safeguards and other measures;

(vii) Any other objects which the Government may consider expedient to support in the overall interest of the mining sector.

77. Contributions to the Fund –

(1) An amount equal to ten per