[2025:RJ-JP:14725] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16299/2024 Kamal Prakash Biyani S/o Shri Sanwal Ram Biyani, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Raghu Colony, Ajmer Road, Kekri, District Ajmer (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner/Applicant Versus 1. Additional Director (Mines), Mines And Geology Department, Jaipur. 2. Assistant Mining Engineer, Mines And Geology Department, Sawar. ----Respondents/Non-Applicants For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lakhan Singh Meena For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Judgment / Order 02/04/2025 This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 22.07.2024 passed by the Court of Joint Secretary, Mines Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur whereby, while dismissing the revision petition preferred by the petitioner, the order dated 20.09.2017 passed by the respondent No.2-the Assistant Engineer (Mining), Jaipur Region, Jaipur, has been affirmed. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner was granted a mining lease of mineral quartz feldspar vide order dated 14.02.2007 for a period of thirty years and the agreement pursuant thereto was registered on 28.04.2007. The Assistant Mining Engineer, Sawar issued a show-cause-notice dated [2025:RJ-JP:14725] (2 of 3) [CW-16299/2024] 10.08.2016 to the petitioner to make payment of the due amount as also to cure the deficiencies pointed out therein. On his failure to do so, he was again issued a show-cause-notice dated 04.01.2017. On account of non-compliance of the notice, the mining lease was cancelled forfeiting the security amount vide order dated 20.09.2017 which was unsuccessfully challenged by him by way of a revision petition which came to be dismissed by the respondent No.1 vide order dated 22.07.2024. The sole contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, assailing the order impugned, is that he did not receive either the notice dated 10.08.2016 or the notice dated 04.01.2017. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed, the order impugned dated 22.07.2024 be quashed and set aside and the mining lease be restored. Heard. Considered. While dismissing the revision petition, the revisional authority has recorded a categorical finding that the notice dated 10.08.2016 was issued to the petitioner by the Assistant Mining Engineer, Sawar through registered post on the address furnished by the petitioner himself through a notarized affidavit dated 07.05.2013. It has further been held by the revisional authority that the petitioner was also given a show-cause-notice dated 10.08.2019 through the registered post on the address furnished by him giving him forty five days’ time to cure the deficiencies pointed out in the notice but, he did not do so. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the aforesaid findings recorded by the revisional authority are perverse or suffer from any infirmity. It has not been case of the petitioner that the [2025:RJ-JP:14725] (3 of 3) [CW-16299/2024] address furnished by him with the Department was ever changed by him. In view of the aforesaid findings, this Court finds no merit in the submission raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 22.07.2024. Resultantly, this civil writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Manish/51