Rajendra JaIn Vs. State and ors

Rajendra Jain vs State and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Oct 17, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1095747

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1095747
Court: Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On: Oct 17, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajendra Jain

Respondent

State and ors

Excerpt

.....it is also noticed that the very same notification dated 03.04.2013 was under challenge in a batch of petitions led by db cwp no.4241/2013: federation of sand stone mining industries association & ors.versus state of rajasthan & ors.wherein, a co.ordinate bench in its order dated 31.07.2013 has held the amendment made in sub-rule (10) of rule 4 and sub-rule (3) of d.b.civil writ petition no.12667/2013. rajendra jain versus state & ors.// 2 // rule 7 of the rules of 1986 to be illegal to the extent it provided for rejection of pending applications. the co-ordinate bench has, inter alia, held as under:- “therefore, impugned amendment dated 03.04.2013 made in sub-rule (10) of rule 4 and rule 7(3) of the rules of 1986 are hereby declared illegal to the extent of rejection of the pending applications and it is directed that all the pending applications filed upto 27.01.2011 shall be decided in accordance with law prevailing prior to issuance of impugned notification dated 03.04.2013........”. the position aforesaid and the relevant observations as made in the aforesaid order dated 31.07.2013 directly apply to the present case too. the matter being concluded so far this court is concerned by the aforesaid order dated 31.07.2013, it appears appropriate and in the interest of justice that this matter be also disposed of in the same terms.accordingly, this petition stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order dated 31.07.2013 as passed in the batch of petitions led by db cwp no.4241/2013. (p.k.lohra).j. (dinesh maheshwari).j. /mohan/

Full Judgment

D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.12667/2013.

Rajendra Jain versus State & ORS.// 1 // .52 D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.12681/2013.

Rajendra Jain versus State & Ors.Date of Order :: 17th October 2013.

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.K.LOHRA Mr.D.D.Thanvi ].Mr.Arvind Shrimali ].Mr.Amit Vyas ]., for the petitioner.

Mr.G.R.Punia, Senior Advocate & AAG with Mr.Yashpal Khileree, Government Counsel, for the respondents.

<><><> BY THE COURT: In this writ petition, the petitioner has essentially put to question the Notification dated 03.04.2013, as issued by the State Government bringing out amendment in the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 ('the Rules of 1986') particularly to the extent it was sought to be applied on the pending applications for grant of mining lease/licence.

It is also noticed that the very same Notification dated 03.04.2013 was under challenge in a batch of petitions led by DB CWP No.4241/2013: Federation of Sand Stone Mining Industries Association & ORS.versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.wherein, a Co.ordinate Bench in its order dated 31.07.2013 has held the amendment made in sub-rule (10) of Rule 4 and sub-rule (3) of D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.12667/2013.

Rajendra Jain versus State & ORS.// 2 // Rule 7 of the Rules of 1986 to be illegal to the extent it provided for rejection of pending applications.

The co-ordinate Bench has, inter alia, held as under:- “Therefore, impugned amendment dated 03.04.2013 made in sub-rule (10) of Rule 4 and Rule 7(3) of the Rules of 1986 are hereby declared illegal to the extent of rejection of the pending applications and it is directed that all the pending applications filed upto 27.01.2011 shall be decided in accordance with law prevailing prior to issuance of impugned notification dated 03.04.2013........”

The position aforesaid and the relevant observations as made in the aforesaid order dated 31.07.2013 directly apply to the present case too.

The matter being concluded so far this Court is concerned by the aforesaid order dated 31.07.2013, it appears appropriate and in the interest of justice that this matter be also disposed of in the same terMs.Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order dated 31.07.2013 as passed in the batch of petitions led by DB CWP No.4241/2013.

(P.K.LOHRA).J.

(DINESH MAHESHWARI).J.

/Mohan/

Same Court & Year Rajasthan Jodhpur · 2013 Same Parties Rajendra Jain vs State and ors Same Subject Education