BALAJI MINERALS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on application under Article 226 (3) of the Constitution of India for vacation of ex-parte interim order dated 22.4.2019.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of the notification dated 9.3.2015 and the agreement (Annexure-9), the petitioner-M/s Balaji Minerals was liable to pay the rate for the land twice to the rate of agricultural land of that area and therefore, the order passed by the Collector (Stamps) dated 21.1.2019 was correct and in order.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notification dated 9.3.2015 would have no effect as the agreement for mining has been executed between the original lease holder namely M/s Patel Minerals and the petitioner-M/s Balaji Minerals. It is submitted that M/s Patel Minerals were not the land owners of the agricultural land and they were also allotted the mines by the State Government vide Mining Lease No. 14/2006. Thus, it is the State Government which was the owner of the land and there was no such private owner.