Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs M/S. Krishna Marble & Anr on 5 May, 2018
Bench: Chief Justice, Vinit Kumar Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 638 / 2018
1. State of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Department
of Mines and Geology, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of
Rajasthan, Udaipur.
3. Mining Engineer, Department of Mines and Geology, Sirohi.
----Appellants
Versus
1. M/s Krishna Marble, 19-C, Old Fatehpura, Udaipur- 313001
Through Its Authorized Signatory Gaurav Raj Prajapat S/o
Shri Laxmi Lal Prajapat, Aged About 25 Years, Resident of :
Village Kavita, Post Thoor, Tehsil Badgaon, Dist. Udaipur.
2. The Union of India Through the Secretary, Ministry of Mines,
New Delhi.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Prithvi Raj Singh, A.A.G., assisted by
Mr.Dinesh Ojha
For Respondent(s) : Mr.M.S.Singhvi, Sr.Advocate, assisted by
Mr.Akhilesh Rajpurohit
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order 05/05/2018
1. We overlook the defects notified by the Registry.
2. Challenge in the writ appeal is to an order dated 02 nd August, 2017 disposing of 21 writ petitions filed by the writ petitioners. The writ petitioners were aggrieved by a general order dated 17 th October, 2015 and consequential orders of different dates cancelling the prospecting license issued to them by the (2 of 3) [SAW-638/2018] Department of Mines, Government of Rajasthan.
3. The case of the petitioners was that they had submitted applications seeking permission to undertake mining activities on the lands referred to the applications and after appraising their applications prospecting license were issued to the writ petitioners on various dates. The grievance was to an enquiry being conducted by the State Government in which the writ petitioners were not involved i.e. were not associated in the enquiry and based on the enquiry report, holding that there were gross irregularity in issuing the prospecting license the general order dated 17th October, 2015 was issued directing prospecting license to be cancelled followed by the individual orders issued to the writ petitioners on various dated.
4. Vide impugned order the learned Single Judge has simply held that if in the grant of prospecting license there was any violation and it was desired to cancel the same, principles of natural justice had to be followed. With reference to the material gathered show cause notice ought to have been issued to those to whom the prospecting license were issued calling upon them to file a reply and then decision had to be taken.
5. While allowing the writ petitions the appellants have been permitted to take action afresh by complying with the principles of natural justice.
6. It is settled law that violation of a principle of natural justice is by itself a wrong justifying quashing of an order which has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and no other (3 of 3) [SAW-638/2018] injury needs to be shown. The only exception to this is the principle of idle formality i.e. where the requirement to follow the principles of natural justice would be an idle formality.
7. In the instant case the principle of idle formality would not be applicable because facts of each case would be different. The persons to whom prospecting license was issued had submitted applications which were processed and only thereafter the prospecting license was issued. If this is cancelled, hearing ought to have been granted.
8. The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed. (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)C.J. Kshama Dixit S-91