MEENAKSHI METACAST (P) LTD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(RAJ)-2013-2-29
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on February 07,2013

Meenakshi Metacast (P) Ltd Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS batch of 22 writ petitions is being disposed of by common order since the controversy involved in these cases is common and the facts of Writ Petition No.8830/2011 (Meenakshi Metacast (P) Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.) are illustratively taken for the said purpose.
(2.) THE petitioners came to this Court challenging the impugned order issued by the Deputy Secretary, Mining Department, Govt. of Rajasthan on 10/3/2010 (Annex.6) reserving the notified Scheduled Tribe areas for mining of major minerals for which Reconnaissance Permits/Prospecting License/ Mining Lease in the specified areas of the State of Rajasthan are to be notified in which the backward class people of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and other Tribal people live and to allow the mining of minerals reserved in the said notified area only to the Govt. of Rajasthan Undertaking, namely; Rajasthan State Mines & Mineral Limited ('RSMM' for short). The petitioners, the private miners or applicants, applied for the mining lease and prospecting licenses in the said reserved area prior to this impugned order dated 10/3/2010 in the year 2008 itself along with the prescribed fee of Rs.5,000.00 but before its applications could be decided, the said Policy decision of the State Government was notified on 10/3/2010 imposing a ban on private operators to undertake any mining work in these reserved areas and in the same order in para 3 it was stated that the applications of the private operators, except in cases where the Courts have passed the stay orders, will be liable to be rejected under the said Policy decision dated 10/3/2010, which is quoted below for ready reference:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]...
(3.) IN pursuance of the said order dated 10/3/2010, the applications of the petitioners came to be straightaway rejected after about one year vide Annex.10 dated 15/3/2011, admittedly, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-applicants and also forfeiting their application fees of Rs.5,000.00 deposited by the petitioners. Aggrieved of the same, the present petitioners approached this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by present set of writ petitions.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.