[2025:RJ-JD:53367]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12388/2023 Doongar Ram Beniwal S/o Achalaram, Aged About 63 Years, By Caste Jat, Resident Of K 29, Maderna Colony, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Joint Secretary, Mines And Geology Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Additional Director (Environment And Development), Directorate Of Mines And Geology, Jodhpur.

3. The Mining Engineer, Mines And Geology Department, Jodhpur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devendra Khatri For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lalit Pareek HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

09/12/2025

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved of the order dated 25.07.2023 (Annex.6) whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed as barred by limitation.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the Additional Director, Mines without dealing with the aspects raised by the petitioner regarding the appeal being within limitation and therefore, the order passed by the Additional Director, Mines deserves to be quashed and set aside.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that the plea sought to be raised by the petitioner stands answered from the annexure(s) filed with the reply and, therefore, the writ petition deserves dismissal.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

5. By order impugned dated 25.07.2023, the appellate though noticed the fact that limitation for filing the appeal is three months from the date of receipt of the impugned order, however, after noticing the said aspect without indicating and/or dealing with the facts pertaining to the plea raised by the petitioner regarding the appeal being within limitation and the respondents' plea indicating the petitioner was well aware of passing of the order impugned, the following has been observed:

"चूंकि(cid:5) उक्त अपील खननपटटा खण्डि(cid:17)त आदेश से 6 माह से अकि(cid:26)(cid:5) समय व्यतीत, होने (cid:5)े पश्चात प्रस्तुत (cid:5)ी है जो ग्राह्य योग्य नही ं होने से किनयम 63 (4) (cid:5)े अन्तर्ग)त अस्वी(cid:5)ृ त (cid:5)ी जाती

है।"

6. The order passed by the appellate authority, for rejecting the appeal as barred by limitation, is absolutely non-speaking and it does not even indicate as to in what manner the plea raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted.

7. In that view of the matter, the order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the appellate authority cannot be sustained, the same is therefore, quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the appellate authority to hear and decide the plea raised by the petitioner pertaining to the appeal being within limitation and objection of the respondents qua the same plea and in case the appeal is found within limitation, to decide the same on merits. The parties shall appear before the appellate authority on

19.01.2026 in the first instance.

8. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

175-/Devesh/-