Authorities Cannot Rely on a Rejected Inspection Report or Cancel Lease While Appeal Against Demand Is Pending, Rules Rajasthan High Court
Jodhpur: The Rajasthan High Court has quashed the recovery proceedings and cancellation of a mining lease after finding that the authorities acted in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Justice Dr. Nupur Bhati passed the order in connected writ petitions, including the petition concerning Smt. Meena Bansal, arising from allegations of illegal mining in Pali.
The dispute arose from allegations that the petitioner had carried out unauthorised excavation of masonry stone outside the permitted mining lease area near Modi Bhakari, Pali. Based on a Panchnama prepared after an inspection on September 4, 2015, the authorities alleged that minerals had been excavated beyond the lease boundary in violation of mining rules. Relying on this report, the authorities subsequently raised a demand of ₹36.22 lakh against the petitioner.
The High Court noted that the competent authority had already rejected the 2015 report and ordered a fresh inspection/re-inquiry on December 29, 2015. However, no fresh inquiry was conducted and the same rejected report was later used as the basis for the monetary demand.
The Court further found that the relevant inspection material was not supplied to the petitioner, depriving her of an effective opportunity to contest the allegations.
The Bench also took note that the mining lease was cancelled on August 22, 2017 while the appeal against the demand was still pending, and possession of the mining area was taken over.
The Court held that the authorities could not rely upon a report they had already declined to accept, without conducting the fresh inquiry they themselves had ordered. Such action, coupled with denial of relevant material and violation of natural justice, was legally unsustainable.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed the impugned demand, cancellation and related orders.
However, the court clarified that it had not decided the merits of the allegations of illegal or excess excavation, leaving those issues open for fresh determination in accordance with law.