Arun Bhansali, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs: - "i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, respondents No. 1 to 9 may be directed to take action against the respondents No. 10 -15 including respondent No. 6 Shri Respondent No. 16 in respect of illegal mining activities if any being carried on by him/them in lieu of which the petitioner was harassed including action as provided under sub -rule (4) and of Rule 48 and sub -rule (5) and the proviso appended to sub -rule (5) to Rule 48; ii) by an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondents No. 1 to 9 may be directed to prevent the respondent No. 10 -15 or any other person from impeding the petitioner from excavating mineral inside his licensed area covered by ML No. 937/91 under the pretext of any political pressure, and to launch prosecution against him against the respondents No. 10 -15 iii) by an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondents may be directed to provide protection to the petitioner and his family from criminal trespassing and harassment by the respondents No. 10 -15 while conducting mining activities in his registered mining area."
(2.) THE petitioner has impleaded the Secretary -Mines Department, Director -Mines and Geology, Minister of Public Health and Engineer Department, Director General of Police, Superintendent of Police, Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsildar, Mining Engineer (Vigilance) as respondent Nos. 1 to 9 and has impleaded certain private persons as respondent Nos. 10 to 16. It is, inter alia, claimed in the petition that petitioner is holding mining lease M.L. No. 937/91 for mineral marble and a gap area allotted on 10.05.2001 pertaining to the area comprised in Khasra Nos. 393 and 411, near Sardulkhera, Tehsil Rajsamand; the petitioner is undertaking mining activities peacefully; however, since past one year the respondent Nos. 10 to 15 under guidance of respondent No. 10 have been harassing the petitioner for extortion money and were interfering in the mining activities in the registered mining area; the petitioner has been constantly approaching all the concerned authorities.
(3.) IT is claimed that as a part of the illegal harassment, a civil suit seeking permanent injunction has been filed, but the respondents could not obtain any relief or injunction pursuant to the same; the respondents are claiming public way in Khasra No. 368, whereas, there is no residence near the allotted mining area and no public way exists; in the year 2009 the petitioner had filed a suit against respondent No. 16 lessee of ML No. 214/96 for clarification of dispute regarding the mining area and public way between the leased areas of the petitioner and respondent No. 16, which suit was eventually withdrawn based on the report of the Tehsildar indicating that the public way falls in the mining area of respondent No. 16 in Khasra No. 368.;