Disposed

M/S Rameshwaram Stone Supplier v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC11 Dec 2024CW/4600/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking execution of a mining lease deed. Acknowledging respondent reluctance due to a past Lokayukta complaint (since closed), the Court directed the Mining Engineer to proceed with execution or pass a speaking order offering opportunity of hearing within nine months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to proceed with execution of lease deed within nine months; if impeded, pass a speaking order after hearing.

M/S Rameshwaram Stone Supplier Vs State of… — Mining and Natural Resources | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:50926]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4600/2004

¶4

M/s Rameshwaram Stone Supplier, Nindhar, through its Partner Smt. Sushila Devi Wife of Shri Bal Ram Meena, resident of Vilage and Post Nindhar, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, through its Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology. Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Mining Engineer, Department of Mines & Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

¶8

Ganesh Narayan Meena Son of Shri Guman Mal Meena, aged about 44 years. Resident of Village Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vimal Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rahul Lodha, AGC Mr. Madhusudhan Rajpurohit for Mr. Kamlakar Sharma, Sr. Adv.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Order

¶12

11/12/2024

¶13

This petition was filed seeking directions to the respondents to execute the lease deed in favour of the petitioner.

¶14

The brief facts are that the petitioner applied for grant of mining lease for an area situated in Village Nindhar, Tehsil Amer. The application was rejected on 05.08.2000 but on 16.03.2001, petitioner succeeded in appeal. The Mining Engineer after verification sanctioned mining lease vide order dated 06.08.2002 for a period of twenty years for a dead rent of Rs. 5000/-.

¶15

One Ramkaran Meena filed a civil suit seeking mandatory injunction against the grant of mining lease to the petitioner. It is an admitted fact that civil suit was ultimately dismissed and has

[2024:RJ-JP:50926]

[CW-4600/2004]

(2 of 2)

attained finality. In the meantime, the petitioner issued notice of demand to the respondent for execution of lease deed. The lease deed was not executed due to the pendency of the complaint filed by Ramkaran Meena before Lokayukta. Hence, the present petition.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been unnecessarily harassed by not executing the lease deed inspite of sanctioning of mining area.

¶21

Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 on instructions submits that the lease deed was not executed due to the pendency of the complaint before the Lokayukta but as per the information received the complaint was closed in the year 2008 and the record was destroyed in 2011. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that mining lease was wrongly sanctioned in violation of the statutory provisions.

¶22

The contention of learned counsel for the respondent No.3 may not be gone into as there is no challenge to the order sanctioning mining lease. 8. The writ petition is disposed of with direction that respondent No.2 shall proceed further in pursuance to the sanction letter dated 06.08.2002 and in case there is an impediment for doing so, respondent No.2 shall pass speaking order after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Let needful be done within a period of nine months from the receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶23

(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J

¶24

Riya/13

¶25

Whether Reportable : No

M/S Rameshwaram Stone Supplier v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Rameshwaram Stone Supplier v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajpura Gram Sewa Sahkari Andors Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Asha Ram Barwar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Green Valley Shiksha Samiti Vs State Education Departmentanr

J K Synthetics Ltd. Vs State

Girraj Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Smt Madhu Devi Goyal Vs State of Raj and Anr.