STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. SHARWAN KUMAR KUMAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these appeals the Appellants seek to overturn the decision of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench declaring sub-rule (10) of Rule 4 and sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") as unconstitutional.

(2.) Heard Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the Appellants and Ms. Shobha Gupta, learned Advocate-on-Record & Ms. Ankita Gupta, learned Advocate, appearing for the Respondents.

(3.) The Rules were brought into statute by the first appellant in exercise of the powers conferred by Sec. 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "1957 Act") for regulating the grant of quarry licenses, mining leases and other mineral concessions qua minor minerals. Chapter II of the Rules deals with grant of leases. Rule 7 speaks of preferential rights of certain persons. As per the said Rule, in existence prior to the amendment made on 28/1/2011, one applicant shall have a preferential right over the others on the sole basis of his application being made prior in point of time. This preferential right was not made available when an application is received from a Government Company or Corporation. It is to be noted, that this Rule does not stand in the way of the first appellant in making appropriate amendments to the Rules in general. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 has provided a list of entities, entitled for a lease on an order of priority.