[2025:RJ-JP:20861] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7216/2025 1. M/s. Prateek Minerals, 6J(A), Malviya Industrial Area, Jaipur - 302017 Through Its Sole Proprietor Shri Prateek Agarwal Residing At 230, Nemisagar Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur-302021 (Raj.). 2. Prateek Agarwal S/o Shri Shankar Lal Agarwal, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of 230, Nemisagar Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur-302021 (Raj.). ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Mines And Geology, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. The Director, Department Of Mines And Geology, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Khanij Bhawan, Shastri Circle, Udaipur (Rajasthan). 3. The Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Opposite Hotel Ashoka, Road No.2, Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.A. K. Sharma, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Karan Tibrewal For Respondent(s) : Mr.Rahul Lodha, Addl.GC. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 16/05/2025 1. By way of filing instant petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 17.04.2025 passed by the respondent No.3 by which penalty has been imposed and recovery orders have been passed against the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:20861] (2 of 3) [CW-7216/2025] 2. Admittedly, the said order is revisable under Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and it is the settled proposition of law that whenever an alternative efficacious statutory remedy is available to a person, he cannot be allowed to bypass the jurisdiction of said Authority. 3. When a right is created by a statute which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing such right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy. 4. It is also well-settled law that in cases when the matter involves disputed questions of fact, the High Court may choose to decline exercise of its jurisdiction in a writ petition. In the instant case also, disputed questions of fact with regard to the illegal operation of mines, even after closure of mines are involved which cannot be adjudicated by this Court in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Hence, on this count alone, the instant petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy under the Act, by way of filing revision before the Revisional Authority. 6. In case, the petitioner files such revision before the Authority concerned within a period of 15 days from today, it is expected from the said Authority to hear and decide the same, expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of two months thereafter. If any stay application is submitted, the same may also be decided expeditiously. [2025:RJ-JP:20861] (3 of 3) [CW-7216/2025] 7. Stay application and all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /156