Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suraj Mal vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 February, 2022
Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Madan Gopal Vyas
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15540/2021
1. Suraj Mal S/o Uda Ji Gurjar, Aged About 48 Years, R/o
Gurjaro Ka Mohalla, Bhachardiya, District Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
2. Suwa Lal Gurjar S/o Goverdhan Gurjar, Aged About 50
Years, R/o Bhachardiya, Kundawa, District Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
3. Vanna Lal Gurjar S/o Jodha Gurjar, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Bhachardiya, Tehsil Deogarh, District Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
4. Dau Ram Gurjar S/o Bagtawar, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Bhachardiya, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
5. Ram Lal Gurjar S/o Remta Gurjar, Aged About 46 Years,
R/o Gurjaro Ka Mohalla, Bhachardiya, Kundawa, District
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
6. Ishwar Lal Gurjar S/o Deva Ji Gurjar, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Bhachardiya, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
7. Suva Lal S/o Bhura Gurjar, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
Ward No. 03 Deogarh, Bhachardiya, Kundwa District
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
8. Narayan S/o Deva, Aged About 58 Years, R/o
Bhachardiya, Kundwa District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And
Geology Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Department Of Mines And Geology,
Government Of Rajasthan Udaipur.
4. The Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology,
Aamet Near Iti Agriya Road Aamet District Rajsamand.
5. District Collector, Rajsamand
6. Tehsildar - Deogarh, Tehsil Deogarh, District Rajsamand
7. Gram Panchayat Bhachardiya, Tehsil Deogarh District
(Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM)
(2 of 7) [CW-15540/2021]
Rajsamand Through Its Sarpanch
8. The Rajasthan Pollution Control Board, Jaipur.
9. Tanmay Singhvi S/o Sh. Nimish Singhvi, aged about 25
years, R/o 15, New Glass Factory Colony, Sundar Vaas,
District Udaipur through its Power of Attorney Holder Shri
Ujjawal Jain S/o Sh. Sohan Lal Jain, R/o Oswal Vada,
Banswara, District Banswara, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajender Katariya
Mr. Gourav Thanvi
Mr. Rajesh Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Shah, AAG with
Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Rathore
Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Rajesh Punia
Mr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. D.P.S. Charan
Mr. S.S. Rathore
Mr. Ankur Mathur
Mr. D.D. Thanvi
Mr. Arvind Vyas
Mr. Amit Vyas
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS Order 15/02/2022 Applications for impleadment as party respondents:
The applications filed by the existing lease holders are considered and allowed and they be impleaded as party respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioners shall supply a copy of the petition along with the documents to the learned counsel for the newly added respondents within a period of one week. In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15540/2021:
This case has been taken up for physical hearing today. (Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM)
(3 of 7) [CW-15540/2021] We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties at some length, except respondent No. 7 who has not been served so far, as learned counsel for the respondents have seriously objected to the very maintainability of the petition on the submission that the petition is devoid of material warranting any interference by this Court in PIL jurisdiction much less grant of interim order.
The writ petitioners seek to raise an issue with regard to the permissibility of grant of mining lease under the State Mineral Rules in certain areas comprised in Khasra numbers namely Khasra No. 150 ad-measuring 50 hectares, Khasra No. 58 ad- measuring 57.39 hectares and Khasra No. 519 ad-measuring 81.34 hectares situated in village Bhachardiya, Tehsil Devgarh, District Rajsamand. In the entire body of petition, the petitioners have sought to raise the issue on the pleadings inter alia that these lands comprise of water bodies, nalas and their catchment areas and the lands on which lease has already been granted or proposed to be granted, falls within the catchment area, therefore, in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Jagpal Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. 2011 SCW 990, Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamla Devi & Ors. (2001) 6 SCC 496 and the decisions of this Court in the cases of Gulab Kothari Vs. State of Rajasthan (DBCWP No. 1554/2004), Kanti Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan (DBCWP No. 7509/2016), the leases could not have been granted and the action of the respondents in proceeding to grant lease should not be allowed. In addition, some pleadings have also been made with regard to alleged violation of requirement of providing compensation lands in lieu of grant of lease for the purposes of pasture(Gochar land). (Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM)
(4 of 7) [CW-15540/2021] To substantiate its case, the petitioners, in addition to their pleadings, have come out with certain photographs said to be collected by the petitioners and their agents and a spot inspection prepared by the petitioners and their associates.
Learned counsel appearing for the State and counsel representing other authorities including the Pollution Control Board (some of them have filed their replies also), have referred to various materials placed in their replies to submit that in the matter of grant of mining lease, the provisions relating to grant of mining lease as contained in the regulatory provisions of the Mineral Rules of the State have been followed and even for the purpose of environmental clearance steps have been taken and lease would not be granted unless no objection is granted from all authorities constituted under various laws. Learned counsel for the State would also submit that in Khasra No. 150, 58 and 519, in all 33 mining leases are proposed to be granted.
Referring to the LOI's in some of the cases, learned counsel for the State would highlight that LOI's have been issued incorporating specific conditions for compliance of the provisions contained under Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Tenancy (Government) Rules, 1955 as also specified conditions of obtaining clearances on environmental aspects and it is only when those conditions are fulfilled, lease would be granted.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has raised an issue with regard to correctness of various spot inspections made, reports of which have been placed on record by the State along with their replies. According to him, NOC granted by the Gram Panchayat or spot inspection which have been carried are all farce and do not reflect the correct picture.
(Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM)
(5 of 7) [CW-15540/2021] In order to substantiate its case in the petition, the petitioners have come out with certain photographs and self made inspection reports. As to how the area over which the mining lease is proposed to be granted, falls within the catchment area, we do not find any clinching materials. Learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out one of the documents filed along with the petition that in Khasra No. 519, a nala is shown over a parcel of land admeasruing 0.13 hectares. Its exact location from the area which is proposed to be granted by way of lease has not been prima facie established from any pleadings and documents on record. Khasra No. 519 comprises of 81.34 hectares of land.
Considering the above material on record, in the absence of there being any challenge to various proceedings which have been drawn, various NOC's which have may have been granted so far including various spot inspections reports, revenue records produced by the respondent-State, the petitioners' case, as it stands today, without further material in support of the petitioners' case, does not warrant continuance of the interim order which has been passed earlier.
We may hasten to add that this petition, which has been filed by the petitioners, seeks to challenge not only the ongoing process of grant of lease to some of the applicants in respect of which LOI's have been issued but also seeks to challenge and assail the existing mining leases which are operating since last many years without there being any challenge and infact some of the lease holders have moved applications for being impleaded as party with the pleading that they have been operating mining since last 10-20 years. Therefore, unless the petitioners are able to satisfy the Court with regard to the provisions relating to the (Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM) (6 of 7) [CW-15540/2021] catchment area, location of the plots, location of water bodies, ponds, nalas, we are not inclined to continue the interim order at this stage and the same is hereby vacated.
A prayer has been made by the petitioners that a prima facie case has been made out to atleast direct enquiry to be made by an officer to be appointed by the Court by way of Commission and a report may be obtained by the Court for the purpose of arriving at a satisfaction by the Court itself in this PIL and to ensure that the lease is not granted contrary to various orders which have been issued by this Court in number of cases referred to herein above.
Considering the submissions, we are inclined to appoint Commission for the purpose of making a spot inspection on following terms:-
1. Relevant Rules, Regulations, circulars, guidelines and instructions with regard to the catchment area of a river/pond/water body on which basis spot inspection is to be carried out;
2. Whether the leases which have already been granted and proposed to be granted are on the parcel of the land comprised in three Khasra Nos. 150, 58 and 519 within the prohibited reach of catchment area.
We appoint Mr. Sharad Kothari, Advocate as an authority to act and assist the Court and to hold spot inspection with the aid and assistance to be provided by the local revenue authorities as may be directed by the District Collector, Rajsamand, with atleast one revenue officer not below the rank of Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue. We also make it clear that since the matter relates to grant of mining lease, a senior mining officer not below the rank of (Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM) (7 of 7) [CW-15540/2021] mining engineer, as may be designated by the district mining officer, shall also provide all assistance to the Commission for facilitating spot inspection and submission of the report of the Commission before this Court.
The parties shall submit additional copies of their pleadings along with the documents before the Registry within a period of one week from today and the Registry shall prepare a paper book, which shall be handed over to the Commission appointed by this Court.
The Commission shall hold an enquiry as directed by this Court and submit its report before this Court within a period of 60 days. The Commissioner shall be entitled to an honorarium of Rs. 50,000/- to be paid by the State.
After submission of the report, such orders, as may be required to be passed, shall be passed by this Court. (MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J 48-jayesh/-
(Downloaded on 18/02/2022 at 08:30:24 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)