[2026:RJ-JP:2903] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18400/2025 Manjeet Kumar Son Of Shri Jagdish, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of 228, Indiwali, Devrala, Distt Bhiwani, (Haryana). ----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 Director, Situated At Shastri Circle, Udaipur (Rajasthan). 3. Mining Engineer, Alwar. 4. Union Of India, Ministry Of Environment, Forest And Climate Change, Through The Secretary, Paryavan Bhawan, Zorbagh, New Delhi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Vyas, ASG (UOI) assisted by Ms. Anushka Khandelwal, Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Sr. Adv./AG assisted by Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma & Mr. Tanay Goyal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 22/01/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayers: “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed on behalf of the petitioner that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and may call for the record concerning the case and by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof: (i) To quash and set aside the impugned auction notice dated 14.11.2025 (Annexure-2) as well as other incidental proceedings arising out of the same (if any); (ii) To restrain the respondents from undertaking auction process of the leases in the Aravali Range and mountain; (iii) Cost of the writ petition may also kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner. (iv) Any other writ, order or direction which may be considered just and fair in facts and circumstances of the instant case may kindly also be passed in favour of the petitioner." 2. During the course of arguments, Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sharma, learned Advocate General and Mr. Bharat Vyas, learned Additional Solicitor General, submitted that there have been [2026:RJ-JP:2903] (2 of 2) [CW-18400/2025] certain subsequent developments in the matter, more particularly the order dated 29.12.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter, In Re: Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges and Ancillary Issues1, wherein it was held as under: "12. In the interim, to subserve the ends of complete justice and in the broader public interest, we deem it necessary to direct that the recommendations submitted by the Committee, together with the findings and directions stipulated by this Court in its judgment dated 20.11.2025, be kept in abeyance. This stay shall remain in effect until the present proceedings reach a state of logical finality, ensuring that no irreversible administrative or ecological actions are taken based on the current framework. 13. We further find it necessary, as a matter of abundant caution, to direct unequivocally, as set out in the order dated 09.05.2024, that until further orders, no permission shall be granted for mining, whether it is for new mining leases or renewal of old mining leases, in the ‘Aravalli Hills and Ranges’ as defined in the FSI Report dated 25.08.2010 without prior permission from this Court" 3. They further submitted that in view of the above judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the relief claimed in the present writ petition does not survive; therefore, the present writ petition has become infructuous. 4. Heard. 5. In view of the above, the present writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 6. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh writ petition, in case, any cause of action survives after the final verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said matter. 7. The stay application and the other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/10 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2997