The Division Bench dismissed the Special Appeal as there were no new grounds raised and the matter was covered by a previous judgment which held that no conflict exists between land conversion powers and mining lease grants.
The appeal was dismissed without modification.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
J U D G M E N T
D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.906/2013
M/s Vishwakarma Bhatta Udyog Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Date of Judgment :: 04.03.2015
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Mr. N.R. Budaniya, on behalf of Mr. Vishal Jangid, for the appellant
BY THE COURT :
The facts and issues raised in this Special Appeal are covered by the Division Bench judgment of this court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.544/2013 “M/s Jai Shri Bricks Manufacturing Vs. State of Rajasthan” and other connected matters decided on 14.11.2014, in which it was held as follows :-
“15. In the present case, we are not concerned with the powers of the Collector for granting leases for running brick-kilns. The issue is confined to the conversion of the khatedari land under section 90A of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 read with Rules of 2007 from agricultural to industrial purposes. The conversion of the land from agricultural to industrial purpose is not an encroachment or is in conflict with the powers of
[2]
the Mining Engineer to grant mining lease on the land. The grant of mining lease does not authorize the licensee to establish and run brick-kiln on the land, which is a khatedari land. It is a permission given for change of user of khatedari land from agricultural to industrial purposes and this permission has to be granted on certain conditions and on payment of minimum rates, which are prescribed under the Rules of 2007. There is no conflict between the powers conferred on the Mining Engineer under Rule 4 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 and the powers conferred on the revenue authorities under section 90-A of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 for conversion of agricultural land for industrial use, for which the procedure and rates are prescribed under the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Conversion of Agricultural Land for NonAgricultural Purposes in Rural Areas) Rules, 2007.
[3]
khatedari land or that such land is not situate in rural areas. There are no pleadings to support the argument raised regarding the location of the land in areas other than rural areas.
We do not find that any new or fresh ground has been raised in this Special Appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
[JAISHREE THAKUR], J. [GOV IND MATHUR], J.
Pramod
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the powers of conversion of khatedari land to industrial purposes and the grant of mining leases are in conflict.
Whether new grounds were raised in the current appeal challenging the decision in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.544/2013.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M/s Jai Shri Bricks Manufacturing Vs. State of RajasthanFollowed¶11
D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.544/2013
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s Vishwakarma Bhatta Udyog
State of Rajasthan
Ors.
Govind Mathur
Jaishree Thakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
