S.S.BYAS, J. - (1.) IN this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for directions to the respondents to grant him a mining lease for sand stone in Budhpura District Bundi.
(2.) MATERIAL facts stated in brief are that the petitioner applied for grant of a mining lease to him, which was granted on 25 -8 -1982. The lease was subsequently cancelled on 20 -9 1983 on the ground of over -laping of the area. The petitioner challenged this action of the respondents by a writ petition in this Court. On 11 -12 -1984, the writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous How ever the learned Counsel for the respondents gave a assurance to the petitioner in the court that every effort will be made to grant him lease in the region desired by him, if the mining area was available for allotmen, The order of this Court is Annexure -1. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted application Annexure -2 on 12 -2 -1985 along with the plan Annexure 2/A and prayed for the grant of the mining lease. This application remained pending with the respondents and was rejected on 4 -8 -1987 by order Annexure 6. It was stated therein that the State Government has taken a policy decision that mining lease for sand stone [in] Bundi district will be granted after delineation of plots of a fixed size in the boundary to be separately notified in the Rajasthan Gazette. This policy decision was expressed in notification Anne -xure -8 dated 16 -12 -1985. It is contended that the approach of the respondents in rejecting his application is arbitrary. His application was kept pending for more than two years. The petitioner has, therefore, again approached to this Court for the reliefs stated at the very outset. The petition is contested by the respondents mainly on the ground that in view of the notification Annexure -8 dated 16 -12 -1985, the application submitted by the petitioner cannot be granted for the area desired by him. If the petitioner applies again for the grant of a mining lease, his application can be considered keeping in view the notification Annexure -8. I have heard the, learned Counsel for the parties at length.
(3.) BEFORE proceeding further it would be useful to state that the petitioner submitted his application Annexure -2 on 12 -2 -1985 when the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1977 (here in after to be referred to as the 'Old Rules') were in force. Notification Annexure 8 was issued when these rules were in force -subsequently in 1986, the aforesaid rules were repelled and the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 (here in after to be referred to as the 'New Rules') came into force w.e.f. 4 -3 -1986.;