Sunday, 10, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M/S Konasth Infrastructure Pvt. ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 906 Raj/2

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 906 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2021

Rajasthan High Court
M/S Konasth Infrastructure Pvt. ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 29 January, 2021
Bench: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
                                         (1 of 4)                  [CW-5498/2020]


       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5498/2020

M/s Konasth Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Through Its Director Hari
Singh Choudhary, Registered Office At 602, 6Th Floor, Apex
Tower, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
       Mines And Geology, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2.     Additional Director (Mines), Headquarters, Directorate Of
       Mines And Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur
3.     Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines, District Jaipur
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Alankrita Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaivardhan Singh Shekhawat

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Judgment

29/01/2021

1. The matter comes up on an application moved by the

petitioner seeking modification of the order passed by the court

dated 05.05.2020.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue

involved in the present petition stands adjudicated by the Division

Bench in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.301/2020: State of

Rajasthan & Ors. Versus M/s Galaxy Mining and Royalties

and other connected matters decided on 29.05.2020. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submits that installments during the

lock-down period could not be paid while earlier amount up to

23.03.2020 has been paid regularly. Learned counsel submits that

(2 of 4) [CW-5498/2020]

in view of the observations and the facts as noticed, the order

passed by the court dated 05.05.2020 be modified and the

petitioner be allowed to resume the work. Learned counsel relies

on the order passed by this court in similar writ petition i.e.

SBCWP No.5497/2020: Surya Pratap Singh versus State of

Rajasthan & others and other connected writ petition decided on

02.12.2020 and prays that same order be passed in favour of the

petitioner.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that

the order passed by the Division Bench in relation to contract in

question therein cannot be generalized.

4. I have considered the submissions.

5. In the bunch of writ petitions decided at Principal Seat,

Jodhpur with lead case i.e. DB Special Appeal Writ No.301/2020,

following order was passed:-

"We are of the firm view that the prevailing COVID-19 Pandemic is an extraordinary compelling situation, which we have not faced for decades together. Drastic measures were required to be taken and severe lockdowns were imposed by the Central and the State Governments to save the lives of the people. For all practical purposes, businesses in the country were crippled. The lockdown has been lifted but with severe restrictions and routine life of the people is limping back to normal at a painfully slow pace. Fully functional operation of businesses including the mining operations/royalty collection is not possible even as on date because still some restrictions are in place.

Thus, we deem it fit to direct that the collection of royalty amount under the contracts in question shall be commenced within a period of three days from today. The writ petitioners (respondents herein) shall clear off their outstanding dues if any (upto 22.3.2020) within

(3 of 4) [CW-5498/2020]

a period of three days thereafter failing which, consequences shall flow as per the stipulations in the contracts. The issue regarding penalty/interest imposed upon the contractors by the State Government shall be open to deliberation/adjudication by the learned Single Bench in the pending writ petitions.

Clause (iii) of the interim stay orders shall stand modified in the term that there shall be no requirement for the State Government to issue specific order to each writ petitioner requiring/permitting them to commence the collection of royalty in furtherance of the respective contract.

As a consequence, the direction given by learned Single Bench in Clause (v) of the interim stay orders requiring the State to give 15 days moratorium to the concerned contractor is set aside.

All the single bench writ petitions shall be listed by the Registry on the scheduled date/s. We request the learned Single Bench to decide the matters at the earliest. The parties shall be at liberty to raise all permissible objections/submissions before the learned Single Bench who shall adjudicate the same without being prejudiced by any of the observations made hereinabove.

With the above modifications in the interim stay orders passed by the learned Single Bench, the appeals are disposed of."

6. In SBCWP No.5497/2020 decided on 2.12.2020 following the

order above, this court passed order as under:-

"Thus, the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that there is no provision under rules for resumption has been aptly examined by the Division Bench and directions have been issued for allowing resumption.

Keeping in view the aforesaid orders, I am inclined to allow this application and direct that if resumption is done within a period of 3 days

(4 of 4) [CW-5498/2020]

as directed by the Division Bench at Principal Seat, Jodhpur, the respondents shall allow them to resume work and collect royalty and other charges.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

The interim order regarding no coercive steps to be taken for the intervening period shall continue."

7. In the present case also, this Court had initially passed an

order on 5.5.2020 restraining the respondents from taking any

coercive steps against the petitioner now.

8. In view of the order passed by the Division Bench (supra),

this court is inclined to allow the application and direct that the

resumption of work be allowed in favour of the petitioner and if

resumption is shown within a period of three days, the respondent

shall allow the petitioner to collect the royalty and other charges

as per the terms of the contract.

9. The application stands accordingly disposed of. The interim

order regarding no coercive steps to be taken for the intervening

period shall continue.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

SAURABH YADAV 670/158

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter