RAMESH MOHANLAL BHANUSHALI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition, the petitioner herein has challenged the inaction on the part of respondent authorities of not passing the order of grant of lease and to execute mining lease agreement pursuant to the grant of quarry lease of Bentonite in Survey No. 3 on private land admeasuring 1/50/75 Hector situated at village: Raydhanjar, Taluka: Abdassa, District: Kachchh and has further prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authority to consider the case of the petitioner as "saved case" under Rule 29(2) and (3) of the Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017.

(2.) The petitioner No.1 having expired is represented through his son by filing present petition. The petitioner applied on 26/2/2016 for grant of quarry lease of Bentonite in the aforesaid survey number on the said land, as stated above. Having preferred such application on 22/7/2016, the respondent No.4 called for opinion/ report from different authorities i.e. DILR, Office of Deputy Conservator of Forest, Mamlatdar- Abdassa, etc. The DILR has already measured and prepared measurement sheet showing specific area. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners applied for N.A. permission of the land in question in the year 2016, however, because of delay on the part of the authority, the same came to be granted vide order dtd. 2/6/2017. It is the case of the petitioner that the DDO had taken the decision on 24/3/2017 by recommending grant of NA permission to petitioner for the land in question which came to be granted by the respondent authority by order dtd. 2/6/2017.

(3.) Placing reliance on the aforesaid fact, it is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners have fulfilled all the requirements, however, because inaction on the part of the respondent authority, the procedure for grant of lease order or Letter of Intent has not been considered. It is the case of the petitioner that during the aforesaid mentioned process, the government framed new Rules i.e. The Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017, which came into operation with effect from 24/5/2017. It is the case of the petitioners that as per Rule 29(1) of the Gujarat Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2017, all the pending applications for grant of quarry lease are treated ineligible, however, there is a saving clause in proviso under Rule 29(2) as amended by Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Amendment Rules, 2018, which includes the case of the present petitioners, as the petitioners have applied for approval of change in land use for NA purpose on 26/2/2016, because though the order granting the said approval was passed on 2/6/2017, the approval was already granted by the Executive Committee meeting dtd. 21/3/2017 and that there is no fault on the part of the petitioners because the delay was caused from the office of DDO to finally pass an order, which is passed after 8 days from the date of coming into effect of the new Rules on 24/5/2017. It is the case of the petitioner herein that the petitioner's case is "saved case" under Rule 29(2) as per the amended Rules and the government is obliged to grant quarry lease to the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioner that on the aforesaid facts, the case of the petitioners be considered as "saved case", as it is coming out that the authority has already decided to grant quarry lease in favour of the petitioner but because of the coming into force of the new Rules, the same was not granted.