Citizens Don't Have Vested Right To Carry On Mining Operations, State Has Absolute Dominion To Decide Areas & Manner To Grant Permit: Rajasthan HC

A division bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Farjand Ali, observed,

"At the outset, we may note that the right to carry on mining operations is not a vested right of any citizen. The State Government has absolute dominion to decide as to the areas and manner in which the mining permits will be granted."

Essentially, the Department of Mines and Petroleum, Government of Rajasthan issued an order dated 16.03.2022 wherein it was mentioned that grave complaints had been received regarding illegal mining of gypsum on the strength of the old permits from government lands, forest lands and private lands. Consequently, it was decided to withhold grant of mining permits in Sriganganagar and Hanumangarh districts till an inquiry could be conducted at the appropriate level regarding the complaints of illegal mining.

The petitioners, by way of this public interest litigation, claimed that the exclusion of the two districts from the ambit of gypsum mining is illegal, arbitrary and amounts to hostile discrimination with the two districts of which the petitioners are residents.

The division bench, while dismissing the writ petition as it being devoid of merit, opined,

"Without any doubt, the respondents were under a lawful obligation to defer any such activity which amounted to illegal mining. For curbing the illegal mining activities, the respondents decided to hold an inquiry and till the conclusion thereof, it was resolved not to grant mining permits in the two districts. The decision so taken is not in the nature of permanent exclusion and is contingent to the conclusion of the inquiry."

It was observed by the court that the writ petition does not involve any public interest. On the specific assertion of the petitioners' counsel that none of the petitioners is desirous of undertaking mining operations in the two districts, the court observed that, in such a situation, the petitioners cannot raise a grievance against the impugned action.

In furtherance, the court clarified that as and when the gypsum mining operations are opened in the two districts, the petitioners shall not be entitled to apply for mining licenses for this purpose in either of these two districts.

Further, the court opined that the respondents acted well within their rights and jurisdiction while provisionally withholding gypsum mining license in these two districts. The court added that it can be expected that as and when the situation improves and the illegal mining operations are detected and dealt with, the respondents would review the decision to not to issue mining licenses in these two districts.

Adv. Rajak Khan and Adv. N.L. Joshi appeared on behalf of petitioners.

Case Title: Kamalkant & Ors. v. State Of Rajasthan

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 132

Click Here To Read/Download Order