[2025:RJ-JD:54690]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20041/2025

M/s Shri Ram Chemical, Through Its Partner Sita Ram Kala S/o Jhumar Ram Kala, Aged About 51 Years, Having Its Office At

Manakpur, Tehsil Khinvsar, Nagaur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Mines

And Petroleum, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,

Rajasthan.

2. The Joint Secretary (Mines), Department Of Mines And

Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur,

Rajasthan.

3. The Director, Department Of Mines And Geology,

Directorate, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

4. The Superintending Mining Engineer, Department Of

Mines And Geology, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

5. The Mining Engineer, Nagaur, Department Of Mines And

Geology, Nagaur-Rajasthan.

----Respondents Connected With

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20039/2025

Deram Ram S/o Dayal Ram, Aged About 65 Years, R/o

Bhawanda Tehsil Khinvsar, District Nagaur Rajasthan

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Mines

And Petroleum, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,

Rajasthan

2. The Joint Secretary (Mines), Department Of Mines And

Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur,

Rajasthan

3. The Director, Department Of Mines And Geology,

Directorate, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur, Rajasthan

4. The Superintending Mining Engineer, Department Of

Mines And Geology, Jodhpur Circle, Ajmer, Rajasthan

5. The Mining Engineer, Nagaur, Department Of Mines And

Geology Nagaur Rajasthan

6. The Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology Nagaur Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Choudhary Mr. Sachin Vyas Mr. Naresh Tak For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG with Mr. Gaurav Bishnoi.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

17/12/2025

1. Counsel for the petitioners submits that, in a similar controversy, the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.01.2025 passed in SBCWP No.18885/2024 titled as “Babu Bhai Patel v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.”, allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned demand notice. He further submits that the Coordinate Bench granted liberty to the State Government to undertake a fresh survey through physical mode/drone, after issuing notice to the petitioner and thereafter, if any recovery is due from the petitioner, the same may be effected in accordance with law. Counsel for the petitioners, thus, submits that similar order may be passed in the present cases as well as has been passed in the case of Babu Bhai Patel (supra). The order dated 07.01.2025 passed in SBCWP No.18885/2024, is reproduced hereunder:

“1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed against the demand notice dated 21.10.2024 issued by the Office of the Mining Engineer, Sirohi, whereby recovery order has been passed against the petitioner for excavating the mines in violation of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been served with any notice before conducting the survey of the area in which the petitioner has been granted the lease for mining. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court rendered in D.B. Special Appeal No.398/2001 (M/s. Mewar Marbles Ltd. Vs. Government of Rajasthan) decided on 09.01.2002. He further submits that the order impugned (Annex.1) has been passed in violation of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court. He, therefore, prays that the order impugned may be quashed and set aside.

4. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General submits that although the petitioner was served with a notice when the land of the petitioner was physically surveyed. However, while undertaking the survey through the drone, the notice was not issued to the petitioner. Learned Additional Advocate General further submits that the respondent-State may be given liberty to re-survey the area in question under the lease of the