Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 607 (RAJ)

Bhagu Lal v. State of Rajasthan

2020-08-24

RAMESHWAR VYAS, SANGEET LODHA

body2020
JUDGMENT Sangeet Lodha, J. - By way of this writ petition (PIL), the petitioners are seeking directions to the Secretary/Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Rajasthan, not to sanction mining lease in khasra nos. 976 and 977 of village Roop Pura, District Bhilwara. Further directions are sought to the District Collector, Bhilwara not to issue NOC for grant of mining lease and to reserve land of khasra nos.976 and 977 for pasturage. 2. Precisely, the case set out by the petitioners is that livelihood of 150 families residing in village Roop Pura is dependent on agriculture and cattle breeding. It is submitted that the land comprising khasra no. 976 and 977 has been developed as pasturage by the villagers. That apart, two small ponds (nadis) and one anicut are also located in the said land. According to the petitioners, Gram Sabha of Gram Panchayat Gyangarh adopted a resolution in its meeting held on 10.10.12 to develop the land comprising khasra nos.976 and 977 alongwith some other lands as pasturage under the MANREGA Scheme. Admittedly, in the revenue record, the said lands are recorded as bilanam Government land. The grievance of the petitioners is that Director, Mines and Geology has issued an advertisement dated 30.7.19 for e-auction of plots for excavation of mineral Granite, which form part of the land comprising khasra no.976 and 977 used as pasturage, not available for allotment. 3. A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents taking the stand that the plots delineated for grant of mining lease for mineral Granite do not form part of pasture land or nadi. It is submitted that the land in question has been recorded in the revenue record as 'Bilanam Gair Kabil Kast' and the nature of the land is mentioned as 'Gair Mumkin Magri'. It is submitted that khasra nos.976 and 977 are big chunk of land and the petitioners have not been able to show that the plots in respect whereof e-auction proceeding has been initiated were ever developed as Charagah or there is existence of any nadi or anicut upon the land. It is averred that the Geologist has undertaken survey of the land and have given its report regarding availability of mineral Granite and therefore, post delineation e-auction notice was issued after seeking requisite sanction. It is averred that the Geologist has undertaken survey of the land and have given its report regarding availability of mineral Granite and therefore, post delineation e-auction notice was issued after seeking requisite sanction. According to the respondents, as per the circular dated 17.1.02 and 7.2.02, the land over which mineral are found cannot be utilised or allotted for any other purpose. It is further submitted that e-auction was conducted and successful bidders have already been declared for 12 plots except plot no.110 and pursuant thereto, except for plot no.111 and 112, the successful bidders have already deposited 40% premium amount as first installment and 'Letters of Intent' have already been issued qua three plots on 29.8.19. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that pursuant to the resolution adopted by the Gram Sabha of Gram Panchayat, Gyangarh, the pasturage has already been developed in the land in question. Learned counsel submitted that despite the representation being made on behalf of the Gram Panchayat to the District Collector, Bhilwara, no steps have been taken to set apart the land as pasture land. It is submitted that the contour and the boundary strengthening the work of nadi has been done by the Gram Panchayat under the MANREGA Scheme. Learned counsel submitted that pursuant to the resolution adopted by the Gram Panchayat in its meeting held on 22.7.18 and 27.8.18, even the report has been submitted to the Tehsildar and SDO to remove the encroachment made by two unscrupulous persons on the land in question. Learned counsel urged that keeping in view the fact that the disputed land has already been put to use as pasturage, the same deserves to be recorded in the revenue record as 'pasture land'. 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State submitted that the petitioners have not specified as to which portion of the land out of the big chunk of the lands comprising khasra no.976 and 977 has been developed as 'pasture land'. Learned AAG submitted that admittedly, in the revenue record, the land is recorded as 'Bilanam Gair Kabil Kast' and thus, if the land has been put to use for pasturage unauthorisedly, the same cannot be declared to be 'pasture land'. Learned AAG submitted that admittedly, in the revenue record, the land is recorded as 'Bilanam Gair Kabil Kast' and thus, if the land has been put to use for pasturage unauthorisedly, the same cannot be declared to be 'pasture land'. Learned AAG submitted that the land which is put to auction after delineation of the plots was never put to use as pasturage and thus, without specifying the land which is developed as pasturage by the Gram Panchayat, no claim even can be made by the Gram Panchayat for setting apart the land as 'pasturage'. Learned AAG submitted that the effective steps have already been taken for grant of mining lease of the delineated plots inasmuch as, pursuant to the auction, number of successful bidders have already deposited 40% of the premium amount as first installment. Learned AAG submitted that without there being the order of the competent authority, no land can be treated to be 'pasture land' on the basis of the averments made by the petitioners herein and thus, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 7. 'Pasture land' as defined by Section 5(28) of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 ('the Act of 1955') shall mean land used for grazing of the cattle of a village or villages or recorded in settlement records as such at the commencement of the Act or thereafter reserved as such in accordance with the Rules framed by the State Government. As per provisions of Section 92 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956( for short "the Act of 1956"), subject to general or special orders of the State Government, the Collector may set apart land for any special purpose such as for free pasturage of cattle, for forest reserve, for development of abadi or for any other public or municipal purpose and such land shall not be used otherwise than for the purpose without the previous sanction of the Collector. Section 16 of the Act of 1955 prohibits accrual of khatedari rights in pasture land. Rule 4 of Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agriculture Purposes) Rules, 1970 which specifies the categories of the land not available for allotment for agriculture purposes includes the lands mentioned in Section 16 of the Act of 1955 which includes the pasture land as aforesaid. 8. Rule 4 of Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agriculture Purposes) Rules, 1970 which specifies the categories of the land not available for allotment for agriculture purposes includes the lands mentioned in Section 16 of the Act of 1955 which includes the pasture land as aforesaid. 8. Section 93 of the Act of 1956 mandates that the right of grazing on pasturage land shall extend only to the cattle of the village or villages for which such land has been set apart and shall be regulated by the Rules made by the State Government. 9. Coming to the Mining Laws, indisputably, as per provisions of Rule 11 (iv) of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017, no mining lease can be granted in respect of the land notified by the Government as reserved for use for the Government or Local Authorities for any public or any special purposes, without permission from the concerned competent authority. 10. Thus, the pasture land is meant for grazing of the cattles of the village or villages and once the land is categorized as pasture land, it cannot be divested to use for any other purposes including the mining operation unless and until in the special circumstances, its classification as pasture land is changed by the competent authority in accordance with the procedure laid down under the relevant Statutes. Further, it is statutory obligation of the state authorities to ensure that the land set apart for pasturage is not divested to be used for any other purpose unauthorisedly. 11. Adverting to the facts of the present case, it is true that the Gram Panchayat has adopted the resolution for developing pasturage on the land comprising khasra no.976 and 977 of village Roop Pura but then, it is not specified as to on which part of the land comprising khasra nos.976 and 977 the pasturage is developed. That apart, admittedly, the land comprising khasra nos. 976 and 977 are recorded in the revenue record as 'Bilanam Gair Kabil Kast' and not as 'pasture land'. Merely because, the Gram Panchayat has passed the resolution for developing the pasturage on the land forming part of khasra nos. 976 and 977, in absence of any order of the competent authority setting apart the land for pasturage, the land cannot be deemed to be categorised as 'pasture land'. Merely because, the Gram Panchayat has passed the resolution for developing the pasturage on the land forming part of khasra nos. 976 and 977, in absence of any order of the competent authority setting apart the land for pasturage, the land cannot be deemed to be categorised as 'pasture land'. It is not even the stand of the respondents that pursuant to the resolution adopted by the Gram Panchayat, the proposal with regard to declaring the land in question as 'pasture land' is pending before the competent authority. In the considered opinion of this Court, if the Gram Panchayat intends to get declared the land in question as 'pasture land', it is under an obligation to make application to the competent authority in accordance with the procedure laid down under the relevant rules. No directions can be issued by this Court to declare the land in question as 'pasture land' on the basis of the vague averments made by the petitioners in the petition as aforesaid. This Court is not inclined to issue any direction to the respondents not to sanction any mining leases in khasra nos. 976 and 977 as prayed for. Of course, the land covered by pond (nadi), if any, cannot be permitted to be divested for any other use. 12. In view of the discussion above, the petition is disposed of with the observations that it will be open for the Gram Panchayat, Gyangarh to make an appropriate representation/application to the competent authority for declaring the land as 'pasture land', which is already put to use as pasturage, in accordance with the relevant rules. If any application/representation is made in this regard, the same shall be considered by the competent authority in accordance with the relevant rules, expeditiously, in any case, within a period of two months. No order as to costs.