Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shiva Corporation (India) Limited vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors on 22 November, 2017
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11399 / 2017
Shiva Corporation (India) Limited Through Its Director Shri Yagya
Pratap Singh Shekhawat S/o Shri Narendra Singh, Aged About 29
Years, Having Its Registered Office At A-24, Ambabadi, Sikar
Road, Jaipur- 302012 (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary to Government,
Mines Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Joint Secretary to Government, Mines (Gr. 2) Department,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Udaipur.
4. Superintending Mining Engineer, Department of Mines and
Geology, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
5. Assistant Mining Engineer, Tehsil Chittorgarh, District
Chottorgarh Rajasthan.
6. Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Enviornment and
Forest & Climate Change, Government of India,
ParyavaranBhawan, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi & Road, New Delhi-
110003.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Sr. Adv. assisted by
Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : Mrs. R.R. Kanwar
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
Order 22/11/2017 The petitioner herein has challenged the notice dated 13.04.2017 as well as the order dated 01.09.2017.
Although it is not disputed that the identical writ petition bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17955/2017 (M/s. Chandak (2 of 3) [CW-11399/2017] Associates vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) has since been dismissed by the Jaipur Bench of this Court on 13.10.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the Rule 5 sub-rule (2) & (4) of The Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 has not been considered. As per the said Rule, all cases covered under this Rule are protected subject to the fulfillment of the condition of the Letter of Intent within a period of one year from the date of commencement of these Rules. The said Rule came into operation on 01.03.2017 and therefore, time was still available with the petitioner to fulfill the said condition but the Letter of Intent has been cancelled before the lapse of one year.
Admittedly, the Letter of Intent ("LOI") was issued to the petitioner on 28.01.2013. The petitioner was required to get the environmental clearance Certificate within the stipulated period under the terms and conditions of the LOI so issued and now the petitioner wants to avail further period of one year stated to be granted under the new Rule. Accordingly, this Court finds no reason to disagree with the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge at Jaipur Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. Chandak Associates (supra) especially when the learned Single Bench too while dismissing the writ petition took into consideration the fact that the petitioner- firm even in that case had failed to comply with the condition of the temporary working permit and the terms and conditions of the LOI. The Court further held that the cancellation of LOI in absence of mining operation by the petitioner-firm cannot be said to be illegal. Besides, the Apex (3 of 3) [CW-11399/2017] Court in the case of Naveen Sharma Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. vide its order dated 16.11.2017 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.34811/2013) has come down heavily on the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change about degradation of the environment in Rajasthan and being totally unconcerned by allowing the mining to continue in spite of their not obtaining environment clearance certificate.
Dismissed accordingly.
(NIRMALJIT KAUR), J.
arvind/37