ORDER : Sandeep Mehta, J. 1. The petitioner M/s. Hindustan Zinc Limited has approached this court through this writ petition for assailing the legality and validity of the Rajasthan Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2007 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2007’). The validity of the Rules has been challenged on the ground that the framing thereof is beyond the rule making power delegated to the State Government under Section 23-C of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1957’. 2. Learned counsel Shri Punit Singhvi, representing the petitioner, addressing the court through VC, vehemently and fervently urged that the Rules of 2007 are nothing but an attempt of the State to exercise control over major minerals/specified minerals, to be specific in the case at hand – Lead-Zinc Ore or Lead Zinc Concentrate, which is a specified mineral/major mineral within the meaning of the Act of 1957. He contended that as the Act of 1957 does not give any jurisdiction to the State Government to legislate for the specified minerals/major minerals, the Rules of 2007 are ultra vires the Constitution of India. It was further submitted that the rules do not have any effective, impartial, independent grievance redressal mechanism inasmuch as appeal/revision against an order of the authorized officer working under the aegis of the Mining Department of the State Government is to be filed to the same Department of the State Government instead of a Mining Tribunal and hence also, the Rules of 2007 are illegal and ultra vires the Constitution of India as well as of the Act of 1957. He submitted that the competent officer under the Rules of 2007 has issued notices/letters to the petitioner raising an issue of loss of revenue on account of mining data contained in the returns of the petitioner for the last 10 years and that the petitioner has challenged these letters by filing a writ petition before Hon’ble Jaipur Bench. He urged that the Act of 1957 is a Central Legislation enacted with reference to entry 54 to List I of the Constitution. He urged that the Act of 1957 is a Central Legislation enacted with reference to entry 54 to List I of the Constitution. By virtue of a declaration made under Section 2 of the Act of 1957, in the public interest, the Central Government holds absolute control on the regulation of mines and development of minerals to the extent provided in the Act of 1957. minerals have been defined under Section 3(aa) of the Act of 1957 to mean “all minerals other than mineral oils” and minor minerals have been defined under Section 3(e) of the Act of 1957. He urged that Lead, Zinc, Copper, Silver and Cadmium are not the minerals covered under Section 3(e) of the Act of 1957. He drew the court’s attention to Section 13 of the Act of 1957, and urged that the Central Government is exclusively empowered to make rules in respect of major minerals. Section 14 of the Act of 1957 excludes minor minerals from the ambit of Sections 5 to 13 of the Act of 1957. He further urged that power conferred upon the State Government is limited to grant of quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals and for the purposes connected therewith. Further submission was made that the Rules of 2007 have been framed for purposes affiliated to mining activities. Thus, it was the fervent contention of Shri Singhvi that under the framework of the Act of 1957, the Central Government has exclusive domain to make rules and regulations for governing all aspects of mining related to major minerals/specified minerals and the State Government is precluded from exercising power in reference to such minerals. He urged that as the enabling provision contained in Section 23C of the Act of 1957 does not give any dominion to the State Government to legislate in relation to major minerals, the Rules of 2007, whereby the State Government has exercised jurisdiction qua major minerals, are clearly ultra vires the Act of 1957. He placed reliance on the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of D.K. Trivedi And Sons & Ors. Vs. State Of Gujarat & Ors. [(1986) SCC Supl. 20] and more particularly, the observations made in paras 32 and 33 of the said judgment, which reads as below : 32. He placed reliance on the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of D.K. Trivedi And Sons & Ors. Vs. State Of Gujarat & Ors. [(1986) SCC Supl. 20] and more particularly, the observations made in paras 32 and 33 of the said judgment, which reads as below : 32. There is no substance in the contention that no guidelines are provided in the 1957 Act for the exercise of the rule-making power of the State Governments under section 15(1). As mentioned earlier, section 15(1) is in pari materia with section 13(1). Section 13, however, contains sub-section (2) which sets out the particular matters with respect to which the Central Government may make rules "In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power", that is, the rule-making power conferred by sub-section (1). It is well settled that where a statute confers particular powers without prejudice to the generality of a general power already conferred, the particular powers are only illustrative of the general power and do not in any way restrict the general power. Section 2 of the Defence of India Act, 1939, as amended by section 2 of the Defence of India (Amendment) Act, 1940, conferred upon the Central Government the power to make such rules as appeared to it "to be necessary or expedient for securing the defence of British Indias the public safety, the maintenance of public order or the efficient prosecution of war, or for maintaining supplies and services essential to the life of the community". Sub-section (2) of section 2 conferred upon the Central Government the power to provide by rules or to empower any authority to make orders providing for various matters set out in the said sub-section. This power was expressed by the opening words of the said sub-section (2) to be "without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by sub-section (1)". This power was expressed by the opening words of the said sub-section (2) to be "without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by sub-section (1)". In King Emperor v. Sibnath Banerji Ors., [1944-1945] 72 I.A. 241, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held (at pages 258-9) : "In the opinion of their Lordships, the function of subs-s. 2 is merely an illustrative one; the rule-making power is conferred by sub-s. 1, and the rules which are referred to in the opening sentence of sub-s. 2 are the rules which are authorized by, and made under, sub-s. 1; the provisions of sub-s. 2 are not restrictive of sub-s. 1, as, indeed, is expressly stated by the words 'without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by sub-s. 1 ." The above proposition of law has been approved and accepted by this Court in Om Prakash and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., [1970] 3 S.C.C. 942,944-5 and Shiv Kirpal Singh v. Shri V.V.Giri [1971] 2 S.C.R. 224-5.” 33. A provision similar to sub-section (2) of section 13, however, does not find place in section 15. In our opinion, this makes no difference. What sub-section (2) of section 13 does is to give illustrations of the matters in respect of which the Central Government can make rules for "regulating the grant of prospecting licences and mining leases in respect of minerals and for purposes connected therewith". The opening clause of sub-section (2) of section 13, namely, "In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power", makes it clear that the topics set out in that sub-section are already included in the general power conferred by sub-section (1) but are being listed to particularize them and to focus attention on them. m e particular matters in respect of which the Central Government can make rules under sub-section (2) of section 13 are, therefore, also matters with respect to which under sub-section(l) of section 15 the State Governments can make rules for "regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals and for purposes connected therewith". When section 14 directs that "The provisions of sections 4 to 13 (inclusive) shall not apply to quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals", what is intended is that the matters contained in those sections, so far as they concern minor minerals, will not be controlled by the Central Government but by the concerned State Government by exercising its rule-making power as a delegate of the Central Government. Sections 4 to 12 form a group of sections under the heading "General restrictions on undertaking prospecting and mining operations". The exclusion of the application of these sections to minor minerals means that these restrictions will not apply to minor minerals but that it is left to the State Governments to prescribe such restrictions as they think fit by rules made under section 15(1). The reason for treating minor minerals differently from minerals other than minor minerals is obvious. As seen from the definition of minor minerals given in clause (e) of section 3, they are minerals which are mostly used in local areas and for local purposes while minerals other than minor minerals are those which are necessary for industrial development on a national scale and for the economy of the country. That is why matters relating to minor minerals have been left by Parliament to the State Governments while reserving matters relating to minerals other than minor minerals to the Central Government. Sections 13, 14 and 15 fall in the group of sections which is headed "Rules for regulating the grant of prospecting licences and mining leases". These three sections have to be read together. In providing that section 13 will not apply to quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals what was done was to take away from the Central Government the power to make rules in respect of minor minerals and to confer that power by section 15(1) upon the State Governments. The ambit of the power under section 13 and under section 15 is, however, the same, the only difference being that in one case it is the Central Government which exercises the power in respect of minerals other than minor minerals while in the other case it is the State Governments which do so in respect of minor minerals. The ambit of the power under section 13 and under section 15 is, however, the same, the only difference being that in one case it is the Central Government which exercises the power in respect of minerals other than minor minerals while in the other case it is the State Governments which do so in respect of minor minerals. Sub-section (2) of section 13 which is illustrative of the general power conferred by section 13(1) contains sufficient guidelines for the State Governments to follow in framing the rules under section 15(1), and in the same way, the State Governments have before them the restrictions and other matters provided for in sections 4 to 12 while framing their own rules under section 15(1). 3.Shri Singhvi urged that as the impugned Rules amount to direct encroachment by the State Government into the powers exclusively conferred upon the Central Government by the Act of 1957, the same deserve to be struck down. 4. Shri Singhvi has filed exhaustive written submissions in support of his oral arguments, wherein, the grounds raised in the writ petition have been reiterated. The grounds, which require special mention, are reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference:- “a) The Centre has the control over the mineral development of the entry 54 to List I of the Constitution. b) That Section 13 of the MMDR Act, 1957 confers power to the Central Government to make rules in respect of minerals. Minerals have been defined under Section 3(aa) of the MMDR Act, 1957 to mean 'all minerals other than mineral oils. Further, minor minerals have been defined under Section 3 (e) of the MMDR Act, 1957. Admittedly, Lead, Zinc, Copper, Silver Cadmium are not the mineral falling under Section 3(e) of the MMDR Act, 1957. e) The power of the State government to regulate with to deal with deal with/regulate major/specified minerals cannot be read by implication and such powers to regulate major/specified must be express and direct in a similar manner as that to Section 15(4) of the MMDR Act, 1957. Further, Section 23-C of the MMDR Act, 1957, itself provides enough indication, in form of 23-C (3), that it is only dealing with minor mineral and not major/specified minerals. Further, Section 23-C of the MMDR Act, 1957, itself provides enough indication, in form of 23-C (3), that it is only dealing with minor mineral and not major/specified minerals. f) That Section 23-C (3) of the MMDR Act, 1957, clearly states that the Central government cannot revise the order passed by the State government under 23-C (1) and (2) of the MMDR Act, 1957. Further, Section 30 of the MMDR Act, 1957, has given power to the Central government to revise any order made by the State government with respect to any mineral other minor mineral. In other words, under section 30 of the MMDR Act, 1957 the hands of Central government have been tied on with respect to minor minerals and rightly so because under the scheme of MMDR Act, 1957 regulation of minor mineral is in exclusive domain of State government. Thus, when Section 23-C (3) of the MMDR Act, 1957 states that Central government cannot revise any order passed by State government it must and it should mean that herein the order passed by the State government must and should relate to minor mineral only and not major mineral/ specified mineral. In absence of such an interpretation it would be difficult to understand that why the Central government will not even have the power to revise the order of the State government in relation to a major mineral/specified mineral at the first instance. h) That as demonstrated above, under Section 23-C of the MMDR Act, 1957, the State has been given the power to regulate the illegal mining only with respect to minor minerals. Therefore, Rajasthan Illegal Mining Rules, 2007, are ultra vires to Section 23-C of the MMDR Act, 1957, in particular and also the overall scheme of the MMDR Act, 1957, whereunder regulation of all aspects of specified minerals/major minerals/non-minor minerals is within the exclusive domain of the Central government. j) For that, it is trite law that power to make subordinate legislation is derived from the enabling act and, fundamentally, the delegate on whom such a power is conferred has to act within the limits of authority conferred by the Act. k) Under the scheme of the MMDR Act, 1957, major minerals/specified minerals are within exclusive control of Central government. In addition, the said underlying scheme is also supported by Section 14 of the MMDR Act, 1957. k) Under the scheme of the MMDR Act, 1957, major minerals/specified minerals are within exclusive control of Central government. In addition, the said underlying scheme is also supported by Section 14 of the MMDR Act, 1957. Further, under the scheme of the MMDR Act, 1957, under certain cases, for example Section 15(4) (which starts with notwithstanding clause) dealing with Section 9-B "District Mineral Foundation", express power has been given to State government to frame rules to limited extent for major minerals. In other words, the scheme of MMDR Act, 1957, in certain circumstances has expressly given power to State government to frame rules on certain aspect regulating/dealing with major minerals.” 5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by Shri Singhvi and have gone through the relevant provisions of law and the precedents relied upon in support of the oral submissions. 6. At the outset, it would be fruitful to reproduce some of the relevant provisions from the Act of 1957 :- “3. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (aa) “minerals” includes all minerals except mineral oils; (e) “minor minerals” means building stones, gravel, ordinary clay, ordinary sand other than sand used for prescribed purposes, and any other mineral which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be a minor mineral;” “4. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (aa) “minerals” includes all minerals except mineral oils; (e) “minor minerals” means building stones, gravel, ordinary clay, ordinary sand other than sand used for prescribed purposes, and any other mineral which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be a minor mineral;” “4. Prospecting or mining operations to be under licence or lease.?(1) [No person shall undertake any reconnaissance, prospecting or mining operations in any area, except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a reconnaissance permit or of a prospecting licence or, as the case may be, of a mining lease, granted under this Act and the rules made thereunder]: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall affect any prospecting or mining operations undertaken in any area in accordance with terms and conditions of a prospecting licence or mining lease granted before the commencement of this Act which is in force at such commencement: [Provided further that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any prospecting operations undertaken by the Geological Survey of India, the Indian Bureau of Mines, [the Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research] of the Department of Atomic Energy of the Central Government, the Directorates of Mining and Geology of any State Government (by whatever name called), and the Mineral Exploration Corporation Limited., a Government company within the meaning of [clause (45) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013), and any such entity that may be notified for this purpose by the Central Government]:] [Provided also that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any mining lease (whether called mining lease mining concession or by any other name) in force immediately before the commencement of this Act in the Union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu.] [(1A) No person shall transport or store or cause to be transported or stored any mineral otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.] (2) [No reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease] shall be granted otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder. [(3) Any State Government may, after prior consultation with the Central Government and in accordance with the rule made under section 18, [undertake reconnaissance, prospecting or mining operations with respect to any mineral specified in the First Schedule in any area within that State which is not already held under any reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease].] “ 5. Restrictions on the grant of prospecting licences or mining leases.? [(1) A State Government shall not grant a 8 [reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease] to any person unless such person? (a) is an Indian national, or company as defined in 1 [clause (20) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013)]; and (b) satisfies such conditions as may be prescribed: [Provided that in respect of any mineral specified in Part A and Part B of the First Schedule, no reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease shall be granted except with the previous approval of the Central Government.] Explanation.? For the purposes of this subsection, a person shall be deemed to be an Indian national,? (a) in the case of a firm or other association of individuals, only if all the members of the firm or members of the association are citizens of India; and (b) in the case of an individual, only if he is a citizen of India.] (2) No mining lease shall be granted by the State Government unless it is satisfied that? [(a) there is evidence to show the existence of mineral contents in the area for which the application for a mining lease has been made in accordance with such parameters as may be prescribed for this purpose by the Central Government;] (b) there is a mining plan duly approved by the Central Government, or by the State Government, in respect of such category of mines as may be specified by the Central Government, for the development of mineral deposits in the area concerned:] [Provided that a mining lease may be granted upon the filing of a mining plan in accordance with a system established by the State Government for preparation, certification, and monitoring of such plan, with the approval of the Central Government.]” “13. Power of Central Government to make rules in respect of minerals.?(1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules for regulating the grant of [reconnaissance permits, prospecting licences and mining leases] in respect of minerals and for purposes connected therewith.” “14. [Sections 5 to 13] not to apply to minor minerals.?The provisions of [sections 5 to 13] (inclusive) shall not apply to [quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions] in respect of minor minerals.” “23C. Power of State Government to make rules for preventing illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals.?(1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules for preventing illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals and for the purposes connected therewith. (2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:? (a) establishment of check-posts for checking of minerals under transit; (b) establishment of weigh-bridges to measure the quantity of mineral being transported; (c) regulation of mineral being transported from the area granted under a prospecting licence or a mining lease or a quarrying licence or a permit, in whatever name the permission to excavate minerals, has been given; (d) inspection, checking and search of minerals at the place of excavation or storage or during transit; (e) maintenance of registers and forms for the purposes of these rules; (f) the period within which and the authority to which applications for revision of any order passed by any authority be preferred under any rule made under this section and the fees to be paid therefor and powers of such authority for disposing of such applications; and (g) any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed for the purpose of prevention of illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 30, the Central Government shall have no power to revise any order passed by a State Government or any of its authorised officers or any authority under the rules made under sub-sections (1) and (2).]” 7. Chapter III of the Act of 1957 deals with the procedure for obtaining prospecting licences or mining leases in respect of the land in which the minerals vest in the Government. Chapter III of the Act of 1957 deals with the procedure for obtaining prospecting licences or mining leases in respect of the land in which the minerals vest in the Government. In this chapter, distinction has been made regarding the appropriate Government in the category of minerals (minor and mineral) in relation whereto the appropriate Government would be empowered to grant licences or leases. Thus, the classification for grant of prospecting licences and mining leases for major and minor minerals amongst the State or the Centre, is provided in this chapter. 8. Under Chapter IV, the Central Government and the State Government have been empowered to make rules limited on the subject of grant of prospecting licences and mining leases. By virtue of Section 5 (falling in Chapter IV), quoted hereinabove, the jurisdiction of the State Government to grant licences has been restricted in respect of minor minerals only. 9. Chapter VII of the Act of 1957 lays down various miscellaneous provisions including offences, penalties and provisions to curb illegal mining, transportation and storage etc. In this chapter, exclusive rule making power of the Central Government is defined under Section 20A, which reads as below :- “20A. Power of Central Government to issue directions.?(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Central Government may issue such directions to the State Governments, as may be required for the conservation of mineral resources, or on any policy matter in the national interest, and for the scientific and sustainable development and exploitation of mineral resources. (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing powers, the Central Government may also issue directions in respect of the following matters, namely:? (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing powers, the Central Government may also issue directions in respect of the following matters, namely:? (i) improvement in procedure for grant of mineral concessions and to ensure co-ordination among agencies entrusted with according statutory clearances; (ii) maintenance of internet-based databases including development and operation of a mining tenement system; (iii) implementation and evaluation of sustainable development frameworks; (iv) reduction in waste generation and related waste management practices and promotion of recycling of materials; (v) minimising and mitigating adverse environmental impacts particularly in respect of ground water, air, ambient noise and land; (vi) ensuring minimal ecological disturbance, in terms of bio-diversity, flora, fauna and habitat; (vii) promoting restoration and reclamation activities so as to make optimal use of mined out land for the benefit of the local communities; and (viii) such other matters as may be necessary for the purposes of implementation of this Act.” 10. By virtue of Section 26, the Central Government has been given authority to delegate its powers to any officer or authority subordinate to the Central Government or to the State Government or its officer or authority subordinate thereto. 11. Section 23C of the Act of 1957 (supra), around which the entire controversy hinges, has no connection with the grant of prospecting licences or mining leases or the power of the Government to frame rules governing these fields. This Section is an empowering provision, which exclusively authorizes the State Government to make rules and develop mechanism for tackling with issues arising from illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals. In this Section, no distinction is made in the category of minerals, i.e. major or minor, over which the power is to be exercised by the State Government. The Section does not give any indication that the State Government’s power thereunder would be restricted to framing regulatory and preventive rules for minor minerals only. 12. As a matter of fact, this Section gives a clear indication that the State Government has been conferred exclusive dominion to frame rules, which would empower the authorities at local level to act for prevention of illegal mining, illegal transportation and illegal storage of all categories of minerals. 12. As a matter of fact, this Section gives a clear indication that the State Government has been conferred exclusive dominion to frame rules, which would empower the authorities at local level to act for prevention of illegal mining, illegal transportation and illegal storage of all categories of minerals. There being no distinction in the category of minerals under this provision, the State Government is fully empowered to exercise powers flowing from this Section to frame the Rules in question, i.e. The Rajasthan Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2007. 13. The fact that this power is within the exclusive dominion of the State Government is further demonstrated by Explanation to Section 21 of the principal Act introduced by virtue of the MMDR Amendment Act, 2021. The explanation has a material bearing on the controversy and is thus, reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference :- “Explanation.—On and from the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2021, the expression “raising, transporting or causing to raise or transport any mineral without any lawful authority” occurring in this section, shall mean raising, transporting or causing to raise or transport any mineral by a person without prospecting licence, mining lease or composite licence or in contravention of the rules made under section 23C.” 14. The newly introduced Explanation makes it amply clear that the illegal activities referred to in the principal Section 21 would cover ‘ANY MINERAL’. 15. Another strong indicator, which affirms our conclusion, is that no distinct rule making power has been conferred by the Act upon the Central Government to frame rules to deal with illegal mining, transportation and storage of major minerals. If the argument of the petitioner were to be accepted, it would imply that the Act is totally silent and does not confer any preventive rule making power qua the above three conditions so far as major minerals are concerned. 16. In the case of D.K. Trivedi (supra) relied upon by Shri Singhvi, the Hon’ble Supreme Court considered a challenge laid to Section 15(1) of the Act of 1957 and very important observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court in this judgment is reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference : 29. The term "minerals" is defined by clause (a) of section 3 as including "all minerals except mineral oils". The term "minerals" is defined by clause (a) of section 3 as including "all minerals except mineral oils". This definition would thus include minerals which are minor minerals as also minerals other than minor minerals. The term "minor minerals" is, however, separately defined by clause (e) because the power to make rules in respect thereof is vested by section 15(1) in the State Governments while the power to make rules with respect to minerals other than minor minerals is vested in the Central Government. The word "minerals" in different sections of the 1957 Act is used with the meaning assigned to it by clause (a) of section 3, that is, as denoting "all minerals except mineral oils", unless the context requires otherwise, and where the Act wishes to make a distinction between minor minerals and minerals other than minor minerals, it does so expressly. For instance, subsection (1) of section 4A speaks of "premature termination of a mining lease in respect of any mineral, other than a minor mineral" and sub-section (2) of section 4A speaks of "premature termination of a mining lease in respect of any minor mineral". To take another illustration, under section 19 any prospecting licence or mining lease granted, renewed or acquired in contravention of the provisions of the 1957 Act or any rules or orders made thereunder is to be void and of no effect. This section would apply to a prospecting licence or a mining lease both in respect of minor minerals and minerals other than minor minerals. Were it not so, the result would be startling for while a prospecting licence or a mining lease in respect of minerals other than minor minerals would be void and of no effect if it is in contravention of the provisions of the 1957 Act or any rules or orders made thereunder, in the case of a prospecting licence or a mining lease in respect of minor minerals such licence or lease would not be void even if it is in contravention of the provisions of the 1957 Act or any rules or orders made thereunder. The Explanation to section 19 is an illustration of a case where the context excludes a prospecting licence or a mining lease in respect of minor minerals and this is by reason of the reference contained in that Explanation to section 6 because by the express terms of section 14, section 6 does not apply to minor minerals. mus, the word "minerals" wherever used in the 1957 Act would include minor minerals unless minor minerals are expressly excluded or the context otherwise requires.” 17. Thus, it is clear that unless the context requires otherwise and where the Act wishes to make a distinction between the minor minerals and major minerals, then it does so expressly. As Section 23C of the Act of 1957 deals with the power of the State Government to make rules for prevention of illegal mining, transportation and storage irrespective of the category of mineral and without drawing any distinction and by using the generic term ‘mineral’, such power would unquestionably be exercisable to frame rules for both minor as well as major minerals. Thus, it can be held with absolute degree of certainty that the State Government has absolute and exclusive power to frame rules on the subjects covered by Section 23C of the Act of 1957. The Rules of 2007 having been framed by the State Government by resorting to this power, the same cannot be termed to be ultra vires. 18. The argument that the Rules should be struck down as the grievance redressal mechanism under the Rules requires that authorities of the same Department would have to be approached to challenge the actions taken thereunder, does not hold water as similar mechanisms are provided under various other statutes. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate as to how, it would be prejudiced by approaching a superior authority of the Mining Department so as to challenge the action taken by a subordinate authority. 19. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate as to how, it would be prejudiced by approaching a superior authority of the Mining Department so as to challenge the action taken by a subordinate authority. 19. This contention advanced by the petitioner that no grievance redressal mechanism is provided is self-contradicted by the written submissions filed by the petitioner, wherein reference is given to the provisions contained under Section 23C(1) and (2) read with Section 30 of the Act of 1957, which gives power to the Central Government to revise any order made by the State Government with respect to any mineral other than minor mineral, meaning thereby, remedy to challenge orders passed by the State Government qua major mineral is available to a party by approaching the Central Government under Section 30 of the Act of 1957. Thus, on this count also, the Rules of 2007 can neither be declared to be ultra vires nor can be questioned as providing no remedy to the aggrieved parties. 20. The challenge laid to an identical set of rules prevailing in the State of Jharkhand was repelled by the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court in Shivam Iron & Steel Co Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. [Writ Petition (C) No.6244/2007 decided on 11.05.2012]. 21. As a consequence of the discussion made hereinabove, we do not find any merit in the challenge laid by the petitioner to the Rules of 2007. The writ petition, thus, lacks merit and is dismissed as such.