UDA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of two writ petitions Nos. 1009/1976. and 1970 of 1976.

(2.) ON 20 -8 -1971, Mining Engineer, Jodhpur issued a public notice that a minor mineral quarry Kali Beri No. 108 of stone had become Khalsa and was available for grant for Rent -cum -Royalty lease, perhaps under Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1956. In was also directed that applications for allotment of the said quarry will be received upto 21 -9 -1971. Hansraj made an application on 21 -9 -1971 and it is conceded on all hands that the lease was sanctioned by the Mining Engineer in his favour. He was directed by a letter dated 1.1.1972 issued by the said Mining Engineer that he should contact the foreman; have the quarry demarcated and complete other formalities within 15 days and if he failed to do so, his application was likely to be dismissed. The quarry was got demarcated on 3 -4 -1972. Hansraj alleges that thereafter he attended the office of the Mining Engineer several times for purpose of depositing the rent and executing the agreement but every time he went, he was put off and could not complete the formalities and by an order dated 5 -11 -1973, the said Mining Engineer withdrew the sanction On 6 -11 -1973. Udaram made an application for the grant of lease Hansraj also applied on 8 -11 -1973. The Mining Engineer, however, holding that the application of Udaram was prior in time, granted the lease under Rule 29 of the said Rules in favour of Udaram. Udaram deposited the rent on 2 -2 -1974 arid executed the agreement of lease on 8 -2 -74. Udaram alleges that since then, he has spent about 15.000/ -on excavation work.

(3.) HANSRAJ filed a second appeal against the order of the Director of Mines with the State Government. The Deputy Secretary in the Department of Mines made an order on May 21, 1976, that the revocation of the grant of the lease in favour of Hansraj was justified. But he also held that the facts that after revocation, no notice was put up on the Notice Board indicating the resumption of the quarry and Udaram presented his application on the very next day and got the quarry allotted in his favour, cast a suspicion on the whole transaction and strengthened the belief that there was certainly some collusion between Udaram and the office of the Mining Engineer. The Deputy Secretary held that the allotment was irregular and set it aside. He remanded the case to the Director, Mines and Geology for further necessary action for the grant of lease afresh of the quarry according to law and procedure.