NARESH VERMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 12-11-1993 (Annexure-9) and the order dated 15-4-1996 (Annexure-11) and further prayed that the respondents may be directed to execute the lease deed of the impugned mine situated in village Latoti Tehsil Jaitaran District Pali measuring 300 x 300 sq. meters in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that an application was filed by the petitioner for grant of mining lease under the Rajasthan mineral Concession Rules 1986 (hereafter, for short "the Rules of 1986) for lime stones on 11-11-1991 for the land situated in village Latoti, Tehsil Jaitaran District Pali and he has prayed that mine measuring 300 x 300 sq. meters of lime stones may be allotted. On application, certain formalities were asked to be completed by the respondent department. Thereafter, allotment order under Rule 8 of the Rules of 1986 was issued in favour of the petitioner on 7-8-1992. In the said order, certain conditions were also incorporated for depositing advance royalty. National saving certificate of Rs. 22,500/-, advance lease of Rs. 22,500/- for three months and stamp papers of Rs. 24,655/- and the petitioner soon after receiving the allotment order deposited all the aforesaid required documents and amount. Thereafter, the Assistant Mining Engineer wrote a letter to the District Collector, Pali for issuance of No objection Certificate but as per petitioner no such condition was made in the allotment order for obtaining n. O. C. from the District Collector and the lease deed was to be executed within a period of three months. The District Collector upon communication sent by Assistant Mining Engineer, Sojat City on 3-11-1992 forwarded the matter to the concerned tehsildar and the concerned Tehsildar sent the same to the Halka Patwari of village latoti for ascertaining correct position of the land.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, a report was furnished by the concerned Patwari which is Annexure-5 and upon perusal of the said report, it is clear that that impugned mine is three kilometer away from the Abadi area and there was no adverse effect, if the impugned lease is allotted to the petitioner. However, the concerned Patwarti reported that there was some encroachment over the impugned land in 2. 6 bighas. The said report submitted by Patwari was submitted before the District Collector through tehsildar.