BHERU GURJAR S/O SHRI SYOKARAN GURJAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/10596/2025 · 2025-07-17
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24375 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24375 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:26683] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10596/2025 Bheru Gurjar S/o Shri Syokaran Gurjar, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Village- Post Dholi, Tehsil- Malpura, District - Tonk, (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary Mines And Geology Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Director, Mines And Geology Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Raj.)
3. Assistant Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Tonk (Raj.)
4. Assistant Mining Engineer (Recovery), Department Of Mines And Geology, Tonk (Raj.)
5. Tehsildar, Tehsil- Malpura, District- Tonk (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Mahendra Singh Gurjar JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 17/07/2025
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders of recovery issued by the Assistant Mining Engineer (Recovery).
2. Admittedly, the aforesaid orders passed by the Assistant Mining Engineer (Recovery) are appealable under Rule 63 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 (for short, “the Rules of 2017”) and without availing the alternative statutory remedy contained under Rule 63 of the Rules of 2017, the petitioner has straightaway approached this Court, by way of filing this writ petition.
[2025:RJ-JP:26683] (2 of 2) [CW-10596/2025]
3. It is settled proposition of law that whenever alternative statutory remedy of filing appeal is available to a person, he cannot be allowed to by-pass the jurisdiction of said Authority.
4. On this count, the instant writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file statutory appeal under Rule 63 of the Rules of 2017 before the Appellate Authority. In case, such appeal is preferred by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today, it is expected from the Appellate Authority to decide the same expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of four months, ignoring the period of limitation.
5. In case, any stay application is submitted by the petitioner, the same would be decided expeditiously as early as possible, strictly in accordance with law.
6. Stay application and all applications (pending, if any)also stand disposed of.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /5