SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JODHP
GORDHAN RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW 3665/2020



Advocates:
['PIYUSH CHOUHAN', '', 'PIYUSH CHOUDHARY', 'SANDEEP SHAH AAG', 'DR NUPUR BHATI', 'VIKRAM SINGH BHATIABDUL MANNAN']

(1 of 5)

[CW-3665/2020]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3665/2020

1.

Gordhan Ram S/o Mewa Ram, Aged About 38 Years,

Caste Jat (Gila), R/o Matabhar Road, Gila Ki Dhani,

Makrana, District- Nagaur.

2.

Raju Ram S/o Late Shyoji Ram, Aged About 48 Years,

Cate Jat Muwal, R/o Muwalon Ki Dhani, Jakhali, Tehsil

Makrana, District - Nagaur.

3.

Bhola Ram S/o Late Shri Ugama Ram, Aged About 47

Years, Cate Jat Muwal, R/o Muwalon Ki Dhani, Jakhali,

Tehsil Makrana, District - Nagaur.

4.

Madhu Ram S/o Shri Baksha Ram, Aged About 40 Years,

Caste Jat (Gila), R/o Gila Ki Dhani, Tehsil Makrana,

District Nagaur.

5.

Khema Ram S/o Hira Ram, Aged About 54 Years, Caste

Jat Bidasar, R/o Bhakaron Ki Dhani, Tehsil Makrana,

District Nagaur.

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of

Mines And Geology, Jaipur.

2.

The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Government Of

Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3.

District Collector, Nagaur.

4.

Sub-Divisional Officer, Makrana, Nagaur.

5.

Tehsildar, Makrana, Nagaur.

6.

Mining Engineer, Makrana, Khanij Bhawan, Makrana.

7.

Assistant Mining Engineer, Makrana, Khanij Bhawan,

Makrana.

8.

Assistant Mining Engineer (Vigilance), Makrana, Khanij

Bhawan, Makrana.

9.

M/s Gulab And Sons, Makrana Through Its Partner Abdul

Gaffar S/o Gulam Rasool, R/o Idgah Road, Gulzarpura,

Makrana.

----Respondents

(2 of 5)

[CW-3665/2020]

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Piyush Chouhan

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Sandeep Shah, AAG assisted by

Ms. Prathyushi Mehta for res. No.1 to

8.

Dr. Nupur Bhati assisted by Mr. Abdul

Mannan and Mr. Sandeep Soni for res.

No.9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Order

22/02/2022

This Civil Writ (PIL) petition has been filed by the petitioners

seeking to espouse public cause by stating that in village Makrana,

Khasra No.103 has been recorded as “Gair Mumkin Rasta”. It is

alleged in the petition that respondent No.9, who was granted

license under Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2007

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of MMCR Rules and/or Rules

of 2007’) by the State Government to work out mining activities

over khasra No.58, in the course of mining, has indulged in illegal

mining and encroached upon part of “Gair Mumkin Rasta”

comprising in Khasra No.103. In order to support his averments,

he has filed alongwith the petition, a large number of reports

prepared by spot inspection, which has been prepared by the

Revenue Officials, which indicate to support the case of the

petitioner that the Gair Mumkin Rasta has not only been

encroached upon being used for dumping extracted mining

materials, but also at various places, it has been dug up which

clearly indicates that a part of the road in Khasra No.58 and 104

has been involved in illegal mining activity.

(3 of 5)

[CW-3665/2020]

Replies have been filed by the State as well as private

respondent No.9-lease holders and other reports have been placed

on record. According to reports, which have been submitted

before the Court by the State, land comprised in Khasra No.103

has been used for dumping and some damage has also been

caused to it by mining activity, but the State’s report does not

clearly state regarding any mining activity carried out on the road.

Some of the reports, which have been placed on record by the

respondent No.5, which include mining engineer’s report does not

support the case of the petitioner, but according to this report,

some activity of dumping extracted material is being carried out

by occupants of Khasra Nos.58 and 103.

The respondent No.9 has sought to oppose the writ petition

on the ground that the respondent No.5 has filed suit seeking a

decree of rectification of records and also for declaration and

permanent injunction in his favour stating that khasra N

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top