- (1.) AFTER having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having examined the record, we have formed an opinion that for obvious inconsistencies, the impugned order dated 27.08.2002 as passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5141/1999 cannot be sustained; and the matter is required to be remanded for consideration afresh.
(2.) IN the aforesaid view of the matter, not much of dilation on the factual aspects and contentions appears necessary. Only a brief reference to the background facts and relevant aspects would suffice. The respondent herein was allotted a mining lease for major mineral Ballclay at Plot No. 4/80, village Litharia, Tehsil Jaitaran, District Pali on 05.10.1981. It had been the allegation of the appellants in the Mining Department that in an inspection dated 20.07.1995, many irregularities and want of safety measures were found in the mining operations as carried out by the lessee- respondent. Consequently, the Director of Mines (Safety), by his order dated 21.07.1995, stopped the mining operations of the respondent until the irregularities were cured and approval in writing was obtained. The respondent purportedly cured some of the irregularities and restricted its mining operations so as to bring them within the permissible limits with open cast working of the mine. Then, the Director of Mines (Safety), by his order dated 09.01.1997, permitted the petitioner-respondent to operate the mine with open cast mining subject to the aforesaid order dated 21.07.1995.
(3.) IN the writ petition leading to this appeal, it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner-respondent that Ravanna Books were not issued in spite of requests made and hence, the mining operations could not be started and yet, dead-rent was being demanded under the impugned communications Annexures-13, 14 and 15. Per contra, it was contended on behalf of the present appellants before the learned Single Judge that the mining operations were stopped for the writ-petitioner having undertaken such operations as deep as 13 metres underground without complying with the safety measures as per the regulations. It was also submitted that even if the writ-petitioner had not carried out the mining operations, he was bound to pay the amount of dead-rent as agreed under the lease deed dated 05.10.1981.;