[2025:RJ-JP:32641] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10904/2025 Komal Prakash Parashar Son Of Late Shri Madan Lal, Aged About 53 Years, Resident Of 641, Bhambhi Mohalla Mangrop, Bhilwara (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Mines And Geology, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Directorate Of Mines And Geology Rajasthan, Through The Additional Director Mines And Geology, Kota Range, Kota. 3. Department Of Mines And Geology, Through Its Assistant Mining Engineer, Baran. 4. Shri Rahul Singhvi S/o Shri Himmat Singh Singhvi, Resident Of Ward No. 9, Main Bazaar, Tehsil - Chhabra District - Baran (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sandeep Singh Shekhawat JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 20/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.4, being the mining lease holder, hired the services of the petitioner for carrying out mining activities through drilling and crusher truck. Counsel submits that the site inspection report was prepared by the Department of Mines, wherein it was alleged that illegal mining activities were conducted on the site and on the basis of the said inspection report, a penalty of Rs.20,67,200/- has been imposed upon the petitioner. Counsel submits that the [2025:RJ-JP:32641] (2 of 2) [CW-10904/2025] petitioner has nothing to do with the illegal mining activities conducted by the mining lease holder, even then not only his truck has been seized but also an exorbitant penalty has been imposed upon the petitioner by the Assistant Mining Engineer vide order dated 22.04.2025. 2. Counsel submits that against the aforesaid penalty order, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply in the form of representation to the Assistant Mining Engineer, but in spite of passing of considerable time, the said reply submitted by the petitioner has not been decided by the Assistant Mining Engineer by passing a reasoned and speaking order, therefore, appropriate orders be passed, directing the concerned Mining Engineer to decide the said reply expeditiously within a time frame. 3. Considering the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by issuing directions to the Assistant Mining Engineer to look into the reply/ representation submitted by the petitioner and pass a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, not beyond the period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 4. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 5. Before parting with this order, it is made clear that this Court has not issued any direction/order to the respondents to decide the reply/ representation of the petitioner in a particular way. The respondents would be at liberty to decide the same, strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /43