Indra Kumar S/O Shri Prabhu Dayal vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 1598 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15101/2020

Indra Kumar S/o Shri Prabhu Dayal, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
Villaage Kali Pahadi, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar Rajasthan,
Through Power Of Attorney Holder Neeraj Patel S/o Late Shri
Puranmal Aged About 32 Years R/o Kanwar Nagar, Village
Basadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj)
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through          Principal    Secretary,
       Department Of Mines And Geology, Government Of
       Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan
2.     Director Mines And Geology, Udaipur Rajsthan
3.     Additional Director, Mines And Geology, Jaipur
4.     The     Superintending          Mining       Engineer,        Jaipur   Circle,
       Department Of Mines And Geology, Jaipur Rajasthan
5.     The Assistant Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And
       Geology, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar, Rajasthan
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Jakhar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Dr. Zakir Hussain, Addl. G.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

15/02/2021

The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner

challenging the survey reports/panchnama dated 11.02.2019 &

07.03.2019 and order dated 14.08.2019 by which the demand

was raised against the petitioner on account of illegal mining

carried out by him.

(2 of 4) [CW-15101/2020]

The petitioner has also made a prayer that proposal to

terminate the lease of the petitioner by order dated 07.02.2020

may be declared illegal and same be quashed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

allegations against the petitioner of illegal mining is not proved at

all. Learned counsel submitted that the so-called inspection

carried out by the respondents for determining illegal mining, the

petitioner was never associated with any inspection and as such

the petitioner had also made a complaint against the persons who

had indulged in illegal activities in the mining of the petitioner.

Learned counsel submitted that if penalty for illegal mining

has been imposed, it was necessary for the respondents to make

inspection of the site in presence of the petitioner and such

illegality is not approved by this Court and as such counsel refers

to a judgment in the case of Mewar Marbles Ltd. Vs. State of

Rajasthan reported in (2002) Western Law Cases (Raj.) UC

213.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel Mr. Zakir Hussain appearing for

the respondent submitted that the writ petition before this Court is

not maintainable against the surveys/panchnama as well as

against demand made by the department vide order dated

14.08.2019.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel submitted that the petitioner

has already filed a revision petition before the State Government

and prayer in the revision petition was to set-aside the

notice/order dated 14.08.2019 and the consequential order dated

02.12.2019.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel submitted that the petitioner

cannot be permitted to avail two remedies and only referring to an

(3 of 4) [CW-15101/2020]

order dated 07.02.2020, recommending termination of lease,

cannot give a cause of action to the petitioner to approach this

Court.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel further submitted that the

Revisional Court, vide order dated 12.02.2020 considered the

prayer of interim relief filed by the petitioner alongwith the

revision petition and the Revisional Authority had stayed the

recovery in pursuance of demand order dated 14.08.2019

provided the petitioner deposited 50% of the total amount within

15 days.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel submitted that the petitioner

has not disclosed this fact in the writ petition and further

petitioner also deposited Rs.3,00,000/- on 02.07.2020.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel submitted that the issue with

regard to illegal mining carried out by the petitioner is the subject

matter of challenge and whatever grounds are available to the

petitioner, the same can be taken by him before appropriate

forum.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel further submits that the

allegation of not giving notice to the petitioner while carrying out

inspection is also not correct. Learned counsel submitted that the

petitioner was issued show cause notice on 06.03.2019 which was

replied by the petitioner on 02.04.2019 and after reply being

found unsatisfactory, the department had again issued a notice on

03.05.2019 which was replied to by the petitioner on 22.05.2019

and thereafter demand of Rs.68,50,376/- was raised.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel submitted that no illegality has

been committed by the respondents in issuing demand

(4 of 4) [CW-15101/2020]

notice/order dated 14.08.2019 and as such this Court may not

interfere in the present matter.

I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for

the parties.

This Court finds that the petitioner has already approached

the Authorities by filing a revision petition under Rule 64 of the

Rajasthan Mines and Mineral Concession Rules, 2017.

This Court further finds that the Revisional Authority had also

passed interim order and as such the petitioner was asked to

deposit 50% of the amount raised in the notice dated 14.08.2019.

The petitioner cannot be allowed to avail two parallel

remedies and since statutory remedy is available to the petitioner,

and as such the writ petition is not entertained.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

Ramesh Vaishnav/86

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)