Disposed

M/S. Galaxy Mining Private Limited v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Sept 2025CW/13669/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A royalty contractor challenged the vires of Rule 44(16) of the Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 requiring fixed guaranteed royalty despite a Supreme Court-directed stoppage of bajari mining. The High Court declined to decide, noting the issue is pending before the Supreme Court, restrained coercive steps against the petitioner, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Respondents restrained from taking coercive steps against the petitioner till disposal of Civil Appeal No.3604-3605/2018; issue left open.

M/S. Galaxy Mining Private Limited Vs State… — Mining and Natural Resources | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:35646-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13669/2025

¶4

M/s. Galaxy Mining Private Limited, Having Its Registered Office At 301, Ganga Heights, Bapunagar, Tonk Road, Near Gandhi Nagar Mod, Jaipur-302015 Through Director Sh. Ram Singh, S/o Sh. Madho Singh, R/o Vijay Singh Ji Ka Bas, Tehsil Phalodi, Udat, Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342307

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

The Director, Department Of Mines And Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur.

¶9

Assistant Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Roopwas (Bharatpur), Rajasthan.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat, Adv. with Mr. Akshay Dutt Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Bharat Vyas, AAG assisted by Mr. Jaivardhan Joshi, Adv. &
	Mr. Lalit Bhardwaj, Adv.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

¶13

Order

¶14

04/09/2025

¶15

Defects pointed out by the Registry are waived.

¶16

Vires of Rule 44(16) of the Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 has been challenged in the writ petition.

¶17

The writ petitioner has royalty contracts as per which they have to pay a fixed amount and are authorized to collect royalty for ‘bajari’. On directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

¶18

[2025:RJ-JP:35646-DB]

¶19

[CW-13669/2025]

¶20

(2 of 2)

¶21

November mining of ‘bajari’ has been stopped. The Rules in question which finds a reflection in the contract requires the guaranteed royalty amount to be paid notwithstanding suspension of excavation of ‘bajari’.

¶22

Both the counsels are ad idem that the issue raised in the present petition is a subject matter of examination before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3604-3605/2018.

¶23

It is also noticed that there is an interim order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.04.2018 directing no coercive steps to be taken by the State till disposal of the SLP No. 34003/2016 in Civil Appeal No.3604-3605/2018.

¶24

Considering that the issue has to be finalized and crystallized only by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we would refrain from making any observations relating to the issue raised before us and leave it open for final adjudication of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶25

However, considering the interim order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we restrain the respondents from taking any coercive steps against the writ petitioner, till the disposal of the Civil Appeal No.3604-3605/2018.

¶26

The present Civil Writ Petition is accordingly, disposed of.

¶27

All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶28

(SANJEET PUROHIT),J

¶29

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶30

HEENA/MAHIMA/195

M/S. Galaxy Mining Private Limited v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Galaxy Mining Private Limited v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jhabar Singh Jat Son of Late Shri Ramnath Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs Managing Committee, Shri Pragya Mahavidyalaya

Ugro Capital Limited Vs Ganpati Packaging Industries

Commissioner, College Education Vs Managing Committee, Churu Balika Mahavidhyalaya

The Union of India Vs No. 2651924 Ex Gdr (Reservist) Karni Singh Son of Sh Bachan Singh

The Union of India Vs Smt. Kemi Widow of No. 8002903 Late Pnr (Reservist) Rewat Ram