CHANCHAL JAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special appeal has been preferred against the order dated 14.10.2019 passed by learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13168/2018, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner.

(2.) The bone of contention in the present case is non-grant of mining lease to the appellant/writ petitioner on account of her non execution of agreement within specified time and not being able to get her land demarcated and since the area fell within the (2 of 4) [SAW-1442/2019] specified area in Aravali Hills. The prospective licenses have been issued in favour of the appellant/writ petitioner on 15.01.1998 and 27.01.1998, but the same were revoked vide orders dated 08.03.2000 and 10.06.1999 respectively. Such non-grant of mining lease to the appellant/writ petitioner, as per her pleaded case, resulted into huge financial loss/damages, wherefore the appellant/writ petitioner has also claimed compensation. The appellant/writ petitioner raised the aforesaid grievances by way of filing the writ petition before this Hon'ble Court, which was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 14.10.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge, while holding that the appellant/writ petitioner has not challenged the revocation of the aforementioned prospective licenses and also the area in question falls within the Aravali Hills Range, which is the prohibited area, in light of the directive of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 16.12.2002 passed in T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad and Society, Protection of Human Rights and Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. (2008) 16 SCC 401, coupled with subsequent amendment in Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, insertion of Section 10A in the Act, in particular. Learned Single Judge has further observed that appropriate remedy for claiming the damages suffered by the appellant/writ petitioner is to file a civil suit before the competent court.

(3.) Power of attorney appearing on behalf of appellant submitted that grant of mining lease in her favour was wrongly revoked as demarcation report was made in her absence and her power of attorney Shri G. L. Jain's signature on documents-field (3 of 4) [SAW-1442/2019] book and demarcation report was forged as it was clearly proved from the Government FSL report dated 04.03.2013. He further alleged that the forgery was committed by the respondent officials, and therefore, they themselves are guilty and are liable to compensate for the losses, damages, injuries, torture etc. suffered by the appellant/writ petitioner. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge erred in giving the finding that the Revocation Order dated 08.03.2000 was never challenged by way of any proceeding, whereas the appellant has filed two Revision applications under Section 30 of MMDR Act, 1957 and Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 before Revisionary Authority against the order dated 08.03.2000 passed by the State Government as well as has raised her grievances before the concerned authorities by way of submitting various representations.