Disposed

M/S Raj Associates v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC17 Dec 2021CW/7958/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Seven connected writ petitions concerning contracts and DMF payment applicability were disposed of by this Court relying on recent precedents. The Court allowed disposition while keeping the matter open for revival if new cause of action arises or future instructions warrant re-agitation.

What did the court decide?

All pending applications disposed of; petitions disposed of while keeping open for re-agitation if cause of action arises.

M/S Raj Associates Vs State and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7670/2016

¶3

M/s. Dev Dashrath Royalites And Tollways

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

----Respondent

Connected With

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7957/2016

¶10

M/s Mateshwari Royalties

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors.

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7958/2016

M/s Raj Associates

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors.

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7962/2016

¶22

M/s Mateshwari Royalties

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors.

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8311/2016

M/s. Raj Associates

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9765/2016

¶34

M/s. Shiv Stone Industries,

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10194/2016

Anand Singh Rathore

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

(2 of 3)

[CW-7670/2016]

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10342/2016

¶48

M/s Mateshwari Royalties

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors.

----Respondent

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9832/2017

¶54

M/s Shri Hari Minerals, Through Its Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Narendra Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar S, By Caste Rajput R/o Rani Deshipura, Tehsil Samdari, District Barmer.

¶55

----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary To The Mining Department, Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Mines And Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur Rajasthan 3. The Mining Engineer, Mines And Geology Department, Barmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sharad Kothari Mr. BS Sandhu Mr. Abhishek Bohra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Digvijay Singh Jasol, AGC

¶56

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶57

Order

¶58

17/12/2021

¶59

The petitioners have preferred these writ petitions, in sum

¶60

and substance, for the following reliefs :

¶61

SBCWP No.7670/2016 :-

¶62

“(1) The impugned order dated 15.06.2016 (Annex.6) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

¶63

(2) The respondents be directed to not to insist or pressurize the petitioner to collect the DMF amount for the contract in question executed between the petitioner and the respondent State Government on 28.03.2016.”

¶64

(3 of 3)

¶65

[CW-7670/2016]

¶66

Counsel for the respondent has shown judgment of this Court in M/s. Gajanand Associates Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8442/2016, decided on 01.12.2021), which was, on the basis of M/s. Harsh Enterprises Vs. State & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8956/2016), decided on 09.11.2021.

¶67

This Court observes that the present controversy is settled in view of the aforesaid order, however, counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the Court is inclined to dispose of these petitions in light of aforesaid judgment, then also their right may be protected in case of receiving instructions from his client to re-address the issue on merits, it shall be open for them to seek for revival of the matter.

¶68

Looking to the peculiar circumstance of the case, these writ petitions are disposed of while keeping it open for counsel for the petitioner to re-agitate the issue on applicability of the judgment and on merits of case in case they receive such instructions, which they do not have today or if any cause of action still remains or arises.

¶69

All pending applications stands disposed of.

¶70

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶71

110-118 nirmala/Sanjay-

M/S Raj Associates v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Raj Associates v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Veer Teja Associates Vs State and Ors.

Dwarka Das Lakhotia Vs Shri Ram Lime Products Pvt. Ltd.

Smt.Amriti Devi and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd., Vs the Collector (Stamps)

Ranjeet Singh Deora Vs Union of India

State of Rajasthan Vs Bhupesh Chandra Pareek