132 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA M/s Sidhi Vinayak Stone Crusher State of Punjab CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Ms. Ambika Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab. ASHWANI KUMAR 1. Controversy raised in the present writ petition stands finally adjudicated by this Court in Crusher vs. State of Punjab and others observations made by this Court 10. In view of the analysis and discussions, aforesaid, we allow all the writ petitions and consequently the demand notices as well as the orders passed in appeals, which are impugned in respective writ petition however, be at liberty to proceed against the petitioners by scrupulously following the procedure laid down for determination of royalty either for violation of Rules, 2013 or Crusher Policy, 2023, by passing appr assessment in accordance with law. For such purposes, the State of Punjab shall also be at liberty to issue notices specifying the nature of violation attributed to each of the petitioners, in terms IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: M/s Sidhi Vinayak Stone Crusher Vs. Punjab and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Mr. V.P.S. Mithewal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ambika Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab. *** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral) Controversy raised in the present writ petition stands finally adjudicated by this Court in CWP-22658-2025, titled Crusher vs. State of Punjab and others, decided on 11.12.2025. observations made by this Court in para No.10 is reproduced herein after: 10. In view of the analysis and discussions, aforesaid, we allow all the writ petitions and consequently the demand notices as well as the orders passed in appeals, which are impugned in respective writ petitions, are quashed. The State of Punjab shall, however, be at liberty to proceed against the petitioners by scrupulously following the procedure laid down for determination of royalty either for violation of Rules, 2013 or Crusher Policy, 2023, by passing appr assessment in accordance with law. For such purposes, the State of Punjab shall also be at liberty to issue notices specifying the nature of violation attributed to each of the petitioners, in terms IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12073-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.04.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR V.P.S. Mithewal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Ambika Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab. Controversy raised in the present writ petition stands finally 2025, titled as M/s Kahlon Stone , decided on 11.12.2025. The in para No.10 is reproduced herein after:- 10. In view of the analysis and discussions, aforesaid, we allow all the writ petitions and consequently the demand notices as well as the orders passed in appeals, which are impugned in s, are quashed. The State of Punjab shall, however, be at liberty to proceed against the petitioners by scrupulously following the procedure laid down for determination of royalty either for violation of Rules, 2013 or Crusher Policy, 2023, by passing appropriate orders of assessment in accordance with law. For such purposes, the State of Punjab shall also be at liberty to issue notices specifying the nature of violation attributed to each of the petitioners, in terms Controversy raised in the present writ petition stands finally M/s Kahlon Stone The 10. In view of the analysis and discussions, aforesaid, we allow all the writ petitions and consequently the demand notices as well as the orders passed in appeals, which are impugned in s, are quashed. The State of Punjab shall, however, be at liberty to proceed against the petitioners by scrupulously following the procedure laid down for determination of royalty either for violation of Rules, 2013 or opriate orders of assessment in accordance with law. For such purposes, the State of Punjab shall also be at liberty to issue notices specifying the nature of violation attributed to each of the petitioners, in terms RAJESH KUMAR 2026.04.23 09:14 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-12073-2026 (O&M) [2] of the rules/policy, wherever applicable, giving the petitioners a reasonable opportunity of hearing, in the matter. 2. Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that the controversy raised is identical. In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is allowed mutatis mutandis in terms of order passed in CWP-22658- 2025 (supra). 3. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE (ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE 22.04.2026 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2026.04.23 09:14 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.