HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12821/2023 Kartar Singh Son Of Shri Nand Ram Jat, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Sriram Colony, Tehsil Rupangarh, District Ajmer At Present Working As Govt. Teacher At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Village Kotadi, Tehsil Rupangarh, District Ajmer (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And Geology, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Deputy Secretary, Govt Of Rajasthan, Mines (Group-2) Department, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Ajmer. 4. Assistant Mining Engineer (Recovery), Department Of Mines And Geology, Ajmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chobisa For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rahul Lodha, AGC JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 17/07/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 17.11.2022 passed by the Mining Engineer, by which the recovery proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner submitted a revision petition before the Deputy Secretary, Mines Department, however, the same was rejected vide impugned order dated 30.06.2023. (2 of 4) [CW-12821/2023] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with any illegal mining activities. Counsel submits that the petitioner is a private agriculturalist and an FIR was registered by the officers of the Mining Department with regard to the aforesaid incident, which was thoroughly investigated by the concerned Police Station and finally, the final report negative was submitted against the petitioner, against which the protest petition was submitted by the informant-complainant before the concerned Court, however, the protest petition was rejected and the final report submitted by the Police was accepted. 4. Counsel submits that when the impugned proceedings were pending against the petitioner before the Mining Engineer (Recovery), the copy of the final report was submitted along with reply, but the same was not considered and a mechanical order has been passed against the petitioner vide impugned order dated 17.11.2022. Counsel submits that when the aforesaid order was assailed by him before the Deputy Secretary, Mines Department by way of filing a revision petition, the protest petition submitted against the final report was pending and on this count alone, the revision petition was rejected. Counsel submits that after rejection of the revision petition by the Deputy Secretary, now the protest petition submitted by the officers of the Department of Mines has been rejected and the final report submitted by the Police has been accepted and the said order has not been assailed by the respondents before any competent forum of law and the same has attained finality. Counsel submits that under these (3 of 4) [CW-12821/2023] circumstances, the petitioner is not liable to pay any sort of amount to the respondents. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner was found doing illegal mining activities, that is why, the order impugned have been passed against the petitioner, which warrants no interference of this Court and the writ petition is liable to be rejected. 6. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 7. Perusal of the record indicates that with regard to allegation of illegal mining activities of the petitioner, an FIR was registered against him, which has resulted in final report negative and the same was produced by the concerned Police Station before the Court of learned Magistrate, where a protest petition was submitted by the officers of the Department of Mining, however, the protest petition was rejected and the final report submitted by the Police was accepted. This fact is not in dispute that the aforesaid order has not been assailed by the Department of Mines before the appropriate forum of law and the same has attained finality. 8. Under the changed circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the matter is required to be examined by the Mining Engineer (Recovery), again in the light of subsequent events, which have occurred in between. 9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 17.11.2022 as well as consequential order dated 30.06.2023 stand quashed and set-aside. The matter is remitted to the (4 of 4) [CW-12821/2023] Mining Engineer (Recovery) to reconsider the matter afresh, after taking into account the final report and the order passed by the learned Magistrate accepting final report and pass reasoned and speaking orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/95