[2025:RJ-JP:25673] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10247/2025 M/s Om Shubham Housing Construction Company Private Limited, Through Its Authorized Signatory Dr. Anita Kanwar Rathore, Kurki House, 897 Gautam Marg, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Forest, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. The Principal Secretary, Mining And Petroleum, Secretariat, Jaipur. 4. The Deputy Chief Conservator Of Forest, Alwar. 5. The Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Alwar ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Sharma-Sr. Advocate Mr. Mukesh Kumar Meena For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 11/07/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “(i)By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof thereby call the entire record pertaining to the present matter and may kindly quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 13.06.2025 and 16.06.2025 passed by the respondents; (ii) By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to continue the mining operation of the mining lease No. 258/89 situated [2025:RJ-JP:25673] (2 of 3) [CW-10247/2025] At Village Talsikalan, Guwada, District Alwar till the application of petitioner is decided. (iii) Any other appropriate order or directions which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the humble petitioner.” 2. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned orders dated 13.06.2025 and 16.06.2025 issued by the Office of Deputy Conservator of Forest, Alwar and the Department of Mining Engineer, Mines and Geology, Alwar respectively. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is conducting mining activities within the prescribed allotted area and this fact is clear from the joint inspection report prepared by the authorities. Counsel submits that without any basis, the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Alwar has sent a letter to the Department of Mining Engineering for taking action against the petitioner for cancellation of his mining activities, as the land of the petitioner is falling under forest area. Counsel submit that a detailed reply to the aforesaid notice has been submitted by the petitioner before the Deputy Conservator of Forest but the said reply submitted by the petitioner has not been decided and in the meantime, the Assistant Mining Engineer, Department of Mines and Geology has issued a notice to the petitioner to comply the order dated 13.06.2025 passed by the Deputy Conservator of Forest. Once this fact from the joint inspection report has been put on record that the petitioner is not doing any illegal mining activities but he is doing mining activities within the prescribed area and when this fact has also been clarified to the respondent by way of filing a detailed reply, no action for cancellation of his [2025:RJ-JP:25673] (3 of 3) [CW-10247/2025] mining lease was required. Counsel submits that even a detailed factual report has been given by the Department of Mining Engineering to the District Collector, Alwar on 17.05.2025, hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. 4 Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Whether the petitioner is doing any illegal mining activities or not and whether the petitioner is doing the mining activities within the prescribed area or not? 6. These are the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court under its jurisdiction contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but looking to the fact that several inspection reports have been annexed with the writ petition and a detailed reply along with this document has been submitted by the petitioner before the respondents. It is expected from the authorities concerned to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner and pass the appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 7. The present writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of 8. For a period of four weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/25