Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) ALL these six appeals are directed against common judgment dated 24.04.2014 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby fifteen writ petitions were disposed of with common direction.
(2.) SINCE identical questions of facts and law are involved, these appeals were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment, treating D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1859/2014 filed by Rishi Kumar Morwal, as the lead case. The appellants approached this court challenging demand notice dated 11.03.2011 and 23.08.2011 issued by the Mining Engineer, Sikar, and order dated 26.03.2012 passed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government, Mines (Gr.2) Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, whereby recovery of penalty for unauthorized excavation of minerals, outside the mining area allotted to writ - petitioners/appellants, was sought to be made. According to appellants, the State Government, on representation of mining lease holders, by order dated 16.05.2007, waived recovery and directed that on condition of deposit of penalty at the rate of Rs. 25/ - per square meter on computing unauthorized mining area and directed that on such deposit the demand notice may be cancelled. According to the appellants, the said order was passed by the Government in exercise of its power under Rule 65 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 (for short, 'the Rules of 1986'). The Directorate of Mines & Geology, Government of Rajasthan, Udaipur, vide order dated 09.05.2008, which was signed by the Superintending Engineer Mines (HQ -III), clarified that in view of order of the Government dated 16.05.2007, unauthorized mining on deposit of one time penalty, has been condoned and would on such deposit, have the effect of regularizing the unauthorized excavation of minerals. Since all mining lease holders, having possession of land in excess, which was leased out to them, were yet excavating minerals from the shifted position outside originally leased mining area, the order of the Government would have effect of regularizing such mining and no separate concession was required to be given by the State Government in this behalf.
(3.) THE Mining Engineer, Sikar, on that basis issued an order dated 23.06.2008 regularizing the mining area outside originally leased area. Consequently, a rider agreement was executed between the writ -petitioners/appellants and the State in each of the cases. It was thereafter that on 11.03.2011 the Mining Engineer, Sikar, issued a notice to the writ -petitioners/appellants stating that an inspection team was constituted to inspect the mining area and it was found that 198436 MT of masonry stone had been unauthorizedly excavated. Accordingly, show cause notice was issued to writ -petitioner/appellant requiring them to deposit ten times royalty of the same. Writ -petitioners/appellant submitted reply to the said notice. The Mining Engineer had issued demand notice on 23.08.2011 requiring him to deposit Rs. 2,12,73,520/ - within a period of fifteen days. Writ -petitioner/appellant Rishi Kumar Morwal filed Writ Petition No. 11892/2011 before this court, which was decided vide judgment dated 07.12.2011, wherein demand was kept in abeyance for a period of thirty days. Appellant was required to approach the revisional authority. Revision petition was filed in all the matters before the State Government. The State Government, vide order dated 26.03.2012, dismissed the revision petition. The Government then passed order dated 27.03.2012, whereby relaxation provided to the appellant and others under Rule 65 of the Rules of 1986 vide which order dated 15.03.2007, was withdrawn. This led to demand of penalty of ten times the amount of royalty on the basis of unauthorized excavation made for the period from 2001 to 2012. Fresh demand notice was then issued on 12.04.2012. It was thereafter that the State Government vide order dated 18.11.2011 formed another committee on instructions of the Lokayukta. The Committee, on direction of Lokayukta, then submitted its report on 18.02.2012. Learned Single Judge, upon hearing the arguments, vide impugned judgment, with consent of both the parties, constituted a committee of (1) Geological Survey of India, Jhalana Doongari, Jaipur, (2) Indian Bureau of Mines, (3) College of Technology, Mining Department, Udaipur and (4) MBM Engineering College, Jodhpur, with a direction to make fresh inspection and submit the report.;