HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR Geetanjali Steel Pvt. Ltd.

----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan & Ors ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15114/2016 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Senior Counsel Mr. R.N. Mathur, Senior Counsel Mr. Akhilesh Rajpurohit Mr. Abhishek Mehta For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.D. Rastogi, A.S.G. through VC (in SBCWP No.15114/2016)

Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG with Mr. Gaurav Bishnoi For Applicant(s) Mr. B.P. Bohra, I.A. No. 01/2025 Ms. Deepika Vyas I.A. No. 03/2025 Mr. Rajat Dave JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

28/04/2025 I.A. No. 01/2025 (in SBCWP No. 15114/2016)

1. The present application under Order I Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure has been moved by the applicant – M/s. Shri Food seeking its impleadment as a respondent, on the ground that it has right and interest in the subject land pursuant to a purchase agreement.

2. In the opinion of this Court, an agreement to sell, sans a registered sale-deed does not convey any title or interest.

3. The application is, therefore, dismissed.

I.A. No. 03/2024 (in SBCWP No. 15114/2016)

1. The present application under Order I Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the applicant – Balram Sharma seeking his impleadment in the writ petition.

2. The applicant has sought impleadment claiming himself to be legal representative of the Khatedar.

3. Having regard to the nature of controversy, in which the petitioner – Company has sought mandamus for granting or executing mining lease, the applicant has not right to be impleaded. The applicant cannot object to grant of mining lease which the State is reluctant due to amendment in the statutory provisions.

4. The applicant, who claims himself to be the owner of the land can be adjudicated only in the proceedings of inter-se title for which D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 59/2023 is pending.

5. The Division Bench by order dated 11.12.2024 has also observed that the applicant as the legal representative of the erstwhile khatedar can only have right to claim return of land or lieu thereof, appropriate compensation, if his land is found to be involved while granting mining lease.

6. The present application is thus, dismissed. However, with a clarification that in case, the appeal filed before the Division Bench or any other matter flowing from the writ petition, which the applicant has taken up when decided, holds that the applicant is entitled for compensation or any other relief, his rights shall not be prejudiced simply because of the dismissal of present application.

1. Having regard to the issue involved and considering that a steel plant with an investment of approximately Rs.1000 Crore is likely to be established, which would generate employment and revenue for the State, this Court deems it appropriate to hear both these matters on a Wednesday, which is otherwise fixed for hearing old cases.

2. List these cases on 21.05.2025 at 11:00 AM, as prayed.

(DINESH MEHTA),J

429-430-Mak/-