BANSILAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ application by Bansilal and six others, who are quarry men in the district of Chittorgarh, under Art. 226 of the Constitution against the State of Rajasthan, the Director of Mines and Geology and one Chunilal, royalty contractor.

(2.) THE case of the applicants is briefly this. THEy say that they are quarry men in certain villages in Tehsil Chittorgarh in the district of Chittorgarh and that those quarries are 'stray deposits' but the State of Rajasthan by passing Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1955, (hereinafter called the 'rules') has started charging rent under rule 57 (2) of the Rules at varying rates between Rs. 12/- to 48/- per year on plots of various sizes and in particular is demanding rent at Rs. 30/- per annum from the applicants for plots measuring 25' x 50' each in their possession, in addition to royalty. THE applicants contend that the State has no right to do this and their reasons for this contention are these, (1) THE Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1955, are ultra vires, illegal and void inasmuch as the Government of Rajasthan had no right to make such rules. (2) No rent can be charged from the applicants as their quarries come within the exemption contained in rule 4 of the Rules. (3) As surface rent is chargeable under rule 31 (2) no further rent can be charged. (4) THEre is discrimination arising by virtue of rule 57 (2) and therefore that rule is invalid under Art. 14 of the Constitution. THE application has been opposed on behalf of the State and they have traversed all the points raised by the applicants. We shall therefore deal with these points one by one.