ORDER : 1. Heard counsel for the parties. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner takes exception to the orders passed by the appropriate Authorities dated 2-8-2013, 31-5-2014 and 8-12-2014 (Annexure-P/1, P/2 and P/3 respectively). 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner was granted quarry lease of flagstone for area admeasuring 1.417 hectare khasra No. 2 at village Kanpora. The lease period commenced from 5-4-2009 up to 5 years i.e. 14-4-2014. By an application dated 6-12-2012, the petitioner requested the respondent No. 3 to consider his application for renewal of the said quarry lease. That application was, however, rejected by respondent No. 3 vide order dated 2-8-2013, principally on the ground that after the amendment to Rule 7(2) of the M. P. Minor Mineral Rules, 1996 (in short "Rules of 1996"), the Government can grant quarry lease of flagstone only by way of auction. The petitioner preferred appeal against the said decision under Rule 57(2) of the Rules of 1996. That appeal was also rejected on 31-5-2014, whilst reiterating the reasons stated by the Collector for rejecting the application for renewal of lease. The petitioner then carried the matter before the respondent No. 2/Director, who in turn rejected the appeal vide order dated 8-12-2014 for the same reason. These orders are subject-matter of challenge in the present petition. 3. According to the petitioner, the amended provisions of Rule 7 of the Rules of 1996 cannot be invoked in the fact situation of the present case as the application for renewal of quarry lease was filed by him on 6-12-2012; whereas the amendment was brought into force after issuance of public notification published in the Official Gazette on 23-3-2013. Further, the amended provisions, in no way, preclude the Authorities from granting renewal of lease keeping in mind the power vested under Rules 17 and 18 of the Rules of 1996. It is then submitted that the question posed by the petitioner has been answered in favour of the petitioner by the Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 4682/2010 decided on 30-8-2011. It is, therefore, prayed that the impugned orders be set aside and instead the respondents be directed to grant renewal of quarry lease for further period as is permissible in terms of Rules 17 and 18 of the Rules of 1996. 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the impugned orders be set aside and instead the respondents be directed to grant renewal of quarry lease for further period as is permissible in terms of Rules 17 and 18 of the Rules of 1996. 4. The respondents, on the other hand, contend that the application for renewal of quarry lease, though submitted on 6-12-2012 was required to be decided as per the prevalent Rules when the same was considered by the Authorities. Further, since Rule 7 has been amended on 23-3-2013, no fault can be found with the approach of the Collector of having decided the application on the basis of said provisions vide order dated 2-8-2013 and for the same reason rejection of the appeals preferred by the petitioner before the superior Authorities. 5. Before we consider the scope of amendment to Rule 7, it is necessary to bear in mind that the factum of application for renewal of quarry lease made by the petitioner on 6-12-2012 will be of no avail. For, it is the well settled legal position that the right of the petitioner is only one of considerations of his application, and which, indeed, must be done in conformity with the Rules prevalent at the relevant time when the decision is taken by the appropriate Authority on such application. Thus, the fact that the petitioner had made application for renewal of quarry lease on 6-12-2012 does not take the matter any further. We will have to examine the claim of the petitioner in the context of the provisions in vogue when the decision was taken by the Collector on 2-8-2013; and moreso because quarry lease granted in favour of the petitioner was in force and subsisting till 14-4-2014. 6. Reverting to Rule 7, which is the fulcrum of the decision of the Collector, it is a provision defining the power to grant trade quarry situated in Government land. The Rule 7, as was in force, when the application was moved by the petitioner, on 6-12-2012, reads thus: 7. Power to grant trade quarry. 6. Reverting to Rule 7, which is the fulcrum of the decision of the Collector, it is a provision defining the power to grant trade quarry situated in Government land. The Rule 7, as was in force, when the application was moved by the petitioner, on 6-12-2012, reads thus: 7. Power to grant trade quarry. - (1) The quarries of Minerals specified in serial number 5 of Schedule I and serial numbers 1, 3 and 4 of Schedule II, situated in Government land, shall be allotted only by auction: Provided that quarry lease of mineral specified in serial number 1 of Schedule II may be granted in favour of the Madhya Pradesh State Mining Corporation. Limited (Government of Madhya Pradesh Undertaking). (2) The quarry of minerals specified in serial number 5 of Schedule I shall be auctioned for five years and quarry of minerals specified in serial numbers 1, 3 and 4 of Schedule II shall be auctioned for two years :- Provided that if contractor establishes cutting and polishing industry, for minerals specified in serial No. 5 of Schedule I, within one year, then period of contract shall be exceeded to ten years at the place of five years and in such condition contract money shall be increased by 10% every year excluding first year. (3) The auction of quarries mentioned in sub-rule (1) shall be conducted in a transparent manner by the Collector/Additional Collector (Senior IAS Scale). [Omitted] (4) The power to sanction and control the quarries mentioned in sub-rule (1) shall vest with the Collector/Additional Collector Senior IAS Scale: Provided that where the bid is an auction is less than the upset price filed by the Government, the Collector/Additional Collector, shall submit a proposal to the Government. The decision of the Government thereon shall be final and binding on the bidder. Since this Rule refers to Schedule I and Schedule II appended to the Rules of 1996, we deem it apposite to reproduce the same, which reads thus :- "Schedule-I (See Rule 6) Specified Minerals 1. Dimensional stone-granite, dolerite, and other igneous and metamorphic rocks which are used for cutting and polishing purpose for making blocks, slabs, tiles of specific dimension. 2. Marble which is used for cutting and polishing purpose of making blocks, slabs, tiles of specific dimension. 3. Marble stone for other purposes. 4. Dimensional stone-granite, dolerite, and other igneous and metamorphic rocks which are used for cutting and polishing purpose for making blocks, slabs, tiles of specific dimension. 2. Marble which is used for cutting and polishing purpose of making blocks, slabs, tiles of specific dimension. 3. Marble stone for other purposes. 4. Limestone when used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material. 5. Flagstone-Natural sedimentary rock which is used for flooring, rooftop etc. and used in cutting and polishing industry. 6. Stone for making gitti by mechanical crushing (i.e. use of crusher). 7. Bentonite/Fuller's earth". (Emphasis Supplied) Schedule-II See Rules 6 and 7) Other Minerals 1. Ordinary Sand, Bajri. 2. Ordinary clay for making bricks, pots, tiles etc. 3. Stone, Boulder, Road Metal Gitti, Dhoka, Khanda, Dressed Stones, Rubble, Chips. 4. Murrum. 5. Lime Kankar when used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material. 6. Gravel. 7. Lime shell when used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material. 8. Reh Mitti. 9. Slate when used for building material. 10. Shale when used for building material. 11. Quartzite and quartzitic sand when used for purposes of building or for making road metal or house-hold utensils. 12. Salt petre. 7. The amendment to Rule 7 came into force after the publication of notification in the Official Gazette in that behalf on 23-3-2013. The Rule was amended on the following terms ;- 8. In Rule 7 :- (1) in sub-rule (1), for the words and figures "serial numbers 1, 3 and 4 of Schedule II" the words and figures "serial numbers 1 and 3 of Schedule II" shall be substituted. (2) for sub-rule (2), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:- "(2) The quarry of minerals specified in serial 5 of schedule I and mineral specified in serial number 1 and 3 of Schedule II shall be auctioned for five years : Provided that if contractor establishes cutting and polishing industry or crusher for making gitti by mechanical means, within a period of 01 year, for mineral specified in serial number 5 of Schedule I and serial number 3 of Schedule II respectively, then period of contract shall be extended up to 10 years instead of 5 years and in such condition annual contract money shall be increased by ten percent every year, excluding first year. For extended period contractor shall submit approved mining plan/approved environment management plan or environment permission as the condition may be. The contractor shall maintain separate account of gitti and mineral while establishing crusher. (3) for proviso to sub-rule (4) the following proviso shall be substituted, namely :- "Provided that where the bid in continuously two auctions is less than the upset price fixed by the Collector, then Collector/Additional Collector after making inquiry of the area, shall revise the upset price. The revised upset price shall not be less than the maximum dead rent specified for that mineral in Schedule-IV: "Provided further that if any declared trade quarry is not auctioned in any period then quarry permit from that quarry for Government work may be granted under sub-rule (1) of Rule 68". 8. Considering the fact that the lease granted in favour of the petitioner was a quarry lease of flagstone, the same after the amendment of Rule 7 in 2013 could be granted only by way of auction for a period of five years and not otherwise. This amendment is in line with the dictum of the Supreme Court in the case of Centre for Public Interest Litigation and others v. Union of India and others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 423 of 2010 and Dr. Subramaniam Swamy v. Union of India and others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 10 of 2011 decided on 2.2.2012 reported in (2012) 3 SCC 1 . 9. On a bare reading of the amended provision, it is noticed that quarry ascribable to serial No. 4 of Schedule II which was earlier part of Rule 7(1) and 7(2) has been dropped. That means that quarry lease for mineral Murrum, is made as an excepted category to be granted without auction. Whereas, the quarry of ordinary Sand, Bajri and for Stone, Boulder, Road Metal Gitti, Dhoka, Khanda, Dressed Stones, Rubble, Chips has been retained in Rule 7 to be allotted only by way of auction. Similarly, the quarry referable to flagstone and Natural sedimentary rock which is used for flooring, roof top etc. and used in cutting and polishing industry (specified minerals) also could be allotted only by way of auction. Similarly, the quarry referable to flagstone and Natural sedimentary rock which is used for flooring, roof top etc. and used in cutting and polishing industry (specified minerals) also could be allotted only by way of auction. Further, the amended proviso below sub-rule (4) of Rule 7 would govern the auction process to be adopted in respect of minerals referred to in serial No. 5 of Schedule I and serial No. 3 of Schedule II. 10. This being the position, no fault can be found with the view taken by the Authorities in rejecting the application for renewal of quarry lease preferred by the petitioner. The Collector in his order dated 2-8-2013 has specifically dealt with this aspect and has observed thus:- vkns'k dzekad@589@[kfut@2012 Jh ';keyky lejokj vk0 Jh ewypanz lejokj fuoklh xzke dkuiksgjk rglhy o ftyk jk;lsu ds i{k esa xzke dkuiksgjk [kljk uacj 2 jdck vokP; 041 gsDVs;j {ks= ij QlhZ iRFkj [knku mR[kfu iV~Vk vof/k fnukad 2009 ls 14&2014 rd Lohd`r gSA mR[kfu iV~Vk/kkjh }kjk fnukad 6&12&2012 dks mR[kfu iV~Vk uodj.k gsrq vkosnu i= izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA e0iz0 'kklu [kfut lk/ku foHkkx ea=ky; ds funsZ'k fnukad 23&3&2012 vuqlkj xkS.k [kfut fu;e 1998 ds fu;e 7¼2½ ds rgr iRFkj dh [knkus 'kkldh; vokP; }kjk gh vkcafVr dh tk ldrh gSA mDr laca/k esa vkosnd dks i= tkjh dj fnukad 17&7&2009 }kjk lwfpr fd;k x;k FkkA ftlds laca/k esa vkosnd }kjk fnukad 27&7&2013 dks viuk i{k fyf[kr esa izLrqr fd;k x;k gS tks lek/kkudkjd ugha gSA vr% xzke dkuiksgjk [kljk uacj 2 jdck 1-417 gsDVs;j ij izLrqr mDr [kfutiV~Vk iRFkj uodj.k vkosnu i= fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA dysDVj egksn; }kjk vknsf'krA (Emphasis Supplied) 11. The Appellate Authority has reiterated this reason in its order dated 31-5-2014 in the following words:- ^^esjs }kjk izLrqr vfHkys[kksa dk fu;eksa ds izdk'k esa voyksdu fd;k x;kA blds i'pkr~ fLFkfr Li"V gksrh gS fd e/;izns'k xkS.k [kfut fu;e] 1966 ds fu;e 7 esa ;g izko/kku gS fd 'kkldh; Hkwfe esa fLFkr Q'khZiRFkj [knku dk vkoaVu uhykeh ds ek/;e ls fd;k tk;sA ftl [knku dk vkoaVu uhyke ds ek/;e ls fd;k tkuk gks] mldk mR[kfuiV~Vk Lohd`r ugha fd;k tk ldrkA mR[kfuiV~Vk uohuhdj.k esa Lohd`fr mijkar uohu vuqca/k dk fu"iknu fd;k tkrk gSA bl vk/kkj ij mR[kfuiV~Vk uohuhdj.k] uohu mR[kfuiV~Vk ekU; gks tkrk gSA fu;e 17 mR[kfuiV~Vk ds uodj.k gsrq vkosnu izLrqr djus ds laca/k esa gSA e/;izns'k xkS.k [kfut fu;e] 1966 esa jsr] iRFkj] Q'khZiRFkj [kfut dks NksM+dj vuqlwph ,d ,oa nks esa nf'kZr 'ks"k [kfutksa ds mR[kfuiV~Vk fn;s tkus dk fu;e esa izko/kku gSA fu;e 17 bu 'ks"k [kfutksa ij izHkkoh gksrk gSA e/;izns'k xkS.k [kfut fu;e] 1966 dk fu;e 6 esa mR[kfuiV~Vk dks iznku djus rFkk uohuhdj.k djus gsrq 'kfDr;ka izR;k;ksftr dh xbZ gS] blds laca/k esa vf/koDrk }kjk fnukad 23&3&2013 dks fd;s x;s la'kks/ku ds vuqlkj blesa Q'khZiRFkj ds laca/k esa dksbZ izfrca/k u gksus dk ys[k fd;k x;k gSA e/;izns'k xkS.k [kfut fu;e] 1966 esa fnukad 23&7&2011 dks fd;s x;s la'kks/ku esa futh Hkwfe ij fLFkr Q'khZiRFkj [kfut ds mR[kfuiV~Vk Lohd`fr rFkk uohuhdj.k gsrq 'kfDr;ka izR;k;ksftr dh xbZ gSA bl la'kks/ku esa 'kkldh; Hkwfe ij Q'khZiRFkj mR[kfuiV~Vk Lohd`fr vFkok uohuhdj.k dh 'kfDr;ka izR;k;ksftr ugha dh xbZ gSaA bldk vk'k; Hkh ;gh gS fd 'kkldh; Hkwfe ij Q'khZiRFkj dk mR[kfuiV~Vk Lohd`r vFkok uohuhd`r ugha fd;k tk ldsxkA bl foospuk ds vk/kkj ij dysDVj jk;lsu }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 2&8&2013 fu;ekuqlkj gksus ds dkj.k izLrqr vihy ,rn~}kjk vekU; dh tkrh gSA** (Emphasis Supplied) 12. While considering the appeal preferred by the petitioner, the Under Secretary, Mineral Resources Department, Government of M.P. vide order dated 8-12-2014, observed thus:- ^^e0 iz0 xkS.k [kfut fu;e] 1966 esa fnukad 23&3&2013 esa gq, la'kks/ku ls ;g Li"V gS fd 'kkldh; Hkwfe ij Q'khZ iRFkj dk mR[kuu iV~Vk Lohd`r vFkok uohuhd`r ugha fd;k tk ldsxkA lapkyd] HkkSfedh rFkk [kfudeZ e/;izns'k] Hkksiky }kjk vius ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31&5&2014 esa leLr rF;ksa ,oa izko/kkuksa dks Li"V djrs gq, vkns'k ikfjr fd;k gSA dysDVj jk;lsu }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 2&8&2013 fu;ekuqlkj gksus ds dkj.k mudh vihy vius vkns'k fnukad 31&5&2014 esa vekU; dh gSA vr% fopkjksijkUr ;g ik;k x;k fd lapkyd] HkkSfedh rFkk [kfudeZ e/;izns'k] Hkksiky }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31&5&2014 esa fdlh izdkj ds gLr{ksi dh vko';drk ugha gSA vr% muds }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31&5&2014 ;Fkkor j[kk tkrk gS ,oa vihykFkhZ Jh ';keyky lejokj }kjk izLrqr mDr vihy jkT; 'kklu }kjk iw.kZ fopkjksijkUr vekU; dh tkrh gSA** (Emphasis Supplied) 13. The moot question is : whether the reason stated by the Authorities is in conformity with the amended provisions of the Rules of 1996. We have no hesitation in upholding the consistent conclusion reached by the three Authorities that the application for renewal could be considered only in the light of Amended provisions which have come into force from 23-3-2013. Going by the said provisions, the quarry lease of flagstone in Government land, as was granted to the petitioner, could be allotted only by way of auction after the said amendment. 14. Counsel for the petitioner, however, relies on the provisions of Rules 17 and 18 of the Rules of 1996. The said Rules read thus: 17. Renewal of quarry lease - Every application for the renewal of a quarry lease shall be made at least one year before the date of which the lease is due to expire. Provided that if an application for renewal of quarry lease made within prescribed period, the period of that lease, shall be deemed to have been extended up to six months, for renewal. 18. Disposal of applications for the grant or renewal of quarry lease. - (1) On receipt of an application for the grant or renewal of a quarry lease, its details shall be first circulated for display on the notice board of the Zila Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat and Gram Sabha concerned of the district and collectorate of the district concerned. 18. Disposal of applications for the grant or renewal of quarry lease. - (1) On receipt of an application for the grant or renewal of a quarry lease, its details shall be first circulated for display on the notice board of the Zila Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat and Gram Sabha concerned of the district and collectorate of the district concerned. (1-A) In addition to sub-rule (1), the details of quarry lease application received for any area shall be published in leading daily Hindi newspaper in the form of notice for general information within fifteen days from the receipt of application. (2) The Sanctioning Authority after making such enquiries as he deems fit, may sanction the grant or renewal of a quarry lease or refuse to sanction it before the expiry of quarry lease already sanctioned : Provided that no quarry lease for new area shall be sanctioned without obtaining opinion of the respective Gram Sabha : Provided further that if the application is not disposed of by sanctioning authority within six months, then application shall be disposed of by senior authority, as mentioned in Rule 6. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (2), all pending applications for the grant inclusive of such applications on which agreements have not been executed on the date of commencement of these rules shall be deemed to have been refused by the Sanctioning Authority. Fresh application in this behalf may be made according to the procedure laid down under these rules. (4) Where an applicant for grant or renewal of a quarry lease, dies before the sanction order is passed it will be deemed to have been filed by his heir and if the applicant dies after the sanction order of grant or renewal but before execution of lease deed it will be deemed to have been granted or renewed to be legal heir of the applicant. (5) Mineral concession to Minerals specified at Sr. No. 1, 2 and 3 of Schedule I may be granted as per the provisions of Granite Conservation and Development Rules, 1999 and Marble Conservation and Development Rules, 2002. 15. According to the petitioner, since power is invested in the Authority to consider the application for renewal of quarry lease, it is coupled with the duty to consider the same and decide the application favourably in absence of any objection received for renewal of the quarry' lease. 15. According to the petitioner, since power is invested in the Authority to consider the application for renewal of quarry lease, it is coupled with the duty to consider the same and decide the application favourably in absence of any objection received for renewal of the quarry' lease. It is not possible to countenance this submission, considering the mandate of amended Rule 7, which necessitates allotment of trade quarry of the stated minerals ascribable to serial No. 5 of Schedule I and serial Nos. 1 and 3 of Schedule II by auction. The power to consider the request for renewal of quarry lease as envisaged under Rules 17 and 18 of the Rules of 1996 by the concerned Authority is ascribable to the other minerals (other than at serial No. 5 of Schedule I and serial Nos. 1 and 3 of Schedule II). Notably, it is not the argument of the petitioner that the petitioner's case falls in the excepted category or for that matter the proviso under sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 as amended. Hence, we need not dilate on the scope of the said proviso. 16. To get over this position, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 4682 of 2010 in Devendra Singh Dangi v. State of M.P. and connected cases, decided on 30.8.2011. In the first place, this decision does not and could not have dealt with the amended provisions of Rule 7 which have come into force much later on 23-3-2013. Moreover, the learned Single Judge in the said case found as of fact, that the Authority had misdirected itself in considering the application for renewal of lease as one for grant of quarry lease and for which reason the conclusion reached by the Authorities in that case was found fault with. The learned Single Judge, therefore, relegated the petitioner before the concerned Authority for reconsideration of his application for renewal of quarry lease. Moreover, the learned Single Judge has not noticed any distinction between the mandate of Rule 7 to grant trade quarry only by way of auction in respect of minerals specified in serial No. 5 of Schedule I and serial No. 1 and 3 of Schedule II. Moreover, the learned Single Judge has not noticed any distinction between the mandate of Rule 7 to grant trade quarry only by way of auction in respect of minerals specified in serial No. 5 of Schedule I and serial No. 1 and 3 of Schedule II. Suffice it to observe that this Authority cannot be cited as precedent or for that matter can have any persuasive value for answering the matter in issue in the present case. 17. Taking over all view of the matter, therefore, no interference is warranted in the fact situation of the present case. Accordingly, we have no hesitation in dismissing this petition being devoid of merits. Ordered accordingly. Petition dismissed.