Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 12554
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Anuroop Singhi, J
AJANTA STONE CRUSHER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7265/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sandeep Singh Shekhawat, Akshay Dutt Sharma
For the Respondents: Rahul Lodha
The court stayed the operation of demand orders on the grounds that relying on repealed statutory rules (Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986) to impose financial penalties is legally untenable.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Demand Notice - Reliance on Repealed Rules - Imposing a financial demand based on provisions of rules that have been repealed (Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986) is legally untenable and unsustainable. (Para 2, 3)
Issues: Whether the demand imposed based on repealed provisions of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986, is sustainable in law.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to a financial demand based on the application of repealed mining rules. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. procedural directions for issuance of notice and scheduling of the matter. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. grant of interim stay on the operation of impugned demand orders. (Para 7) |
Order
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 06.01.2026 (Annexure-12) passed by the Additional Director (Mines), Kota-Zone, Kota, vide which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 02.02.2024 (Annexure-11) passed by the Assistant Mining Engineer, Baran, vide which a demand of Rs.1,54,63,590/- was imposed upon the petitioner, has been dismissed.
2. Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submits that from the bare perusal of not only the order dated 02.02.2024, but also from the impugned order dated 06.01.2026, it is evident that for imposing the impugned demand reliance has been placed upon Rule 48 and 68 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 , which stood repealed in the year 2017 upon the promulgation of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 , and thus, reliance upon the said repealed provisions is wholly untenable in law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that despite the aforesaid submission, no consideration thereof has been made, which renders the impugned orders as well as the demand assailed therein illegal and unsustainable in law.
4. Taking note of the aforesaid submissions, issue notice to the respondents, returnable within four weeks.
5. Additionally, learned counsel for the petitioner would be at liberty to serve a copy of the writ petition in the Office of Mr. Rahul Lodha, learned AGC, on behalf of all the respondents.
6. List the matter on 25.05.2026, after showing the name of Mr. Rahul Lodha, learned AGC, in the cause list.
7. Till the next date, the effect and operation of the orders dated 02.02.2024 (Annexure-11) and 06.01.2026 (Annexure-12) shall remain stayed.
