Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) Instant intra -court appeal is directed against order of the ld. Single Judge dt. 05.10.2012 dismissing the writ petition in limine at the admission stage holding that since in the order of the District Collector dt. 23.02.2012 allotment has been made with the condition that the appellant may approach the Rajasthan High Court and obtain NOC for grant of mining lease over the land classified as 'Johad' means 'a water reservoir' and if at all the land is a 'Johad' i.e. water reservoir which cannot be approved for mining lease in view of the judgment of Division Bench of this court in Abdul Rahman v/s. State of Rajasthan & Others reported in, 2004 (4) WLC (Raj.) 435 and being a disputed question of facts as to whether the subject land is a 'Johad' is to be decided by the authorities and treating the writ petition to be misconceived, accordingly dismissed.
(2.) The brief facts that can be culled out from the averments made in the writ petition and since that has not been considered by the ld. Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition under order impugned, for appreciation, it is necessary to glance through a few relevant facts for examining the controversy involved in the instant special appeal. The appellant is a registered Company and a subsidiary of Grasim Industries Ltd. and incorporated and registered under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956.
(3.) The appellant -Company, as alleged, has other two running cement plants in the State of Rajasthan for cement manufacturing. The present dispute relates to Nawalgarh Cement Works, a unit of Ultratech Cement Ltd. Initially, applications for grant of mining lease bearing Nos. 14/2000 & 6/2001 for mineral lime stone (cement grade) were moved for area covering 11.539 KMs & 34.612 Sq. KMs. on 22.09.2000 & 29.03.2001 respectively in Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu. The letter of intent was issued by the State Government on 16.03.2002 in respect of M.L. No. 14/2000 and on 03.04.2003 for M.L. No. 6/2001 with the condition to obtain environment clearance within six months. Because of non -availability of environment clearance certificate both the LOIs were cancelled by the State Government vide order dt. 07.02.2005 which came to be challenged by the appellant in a revision petition and the same was allowed by the revisional authority vide order dt. 19.07.2007 and the matter was remitted back to the State Government to re -look and examine the matter afresh in accordance with law.;