Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 395 (RAJ)

Graphtec Exim Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan

2025-02-17

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2025
ORDER : (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers :- “It is, therefore, most humble and respectfully prayed that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction:- i. Allow the petitioner to participate in the E-tender funs@v-[k-v- uhykeh@ uhykeh ¼ ML Bajri XVI ½ @2024@bZ & 0894 dated 26.10.2024 (Annex.4) process for the allocation of Bajri mining leases without the requirement of depositing a bank guarantee, in light of the substantial amounts already deposited with the respondents, which remain blocked unjustly. ii. It is also prayed that the respondents may kindly be ordered to implement the orders passed by the State Government dated 20.01.2023 (Annex.1) and 24.05.2024 (Annex.7) as well as directions issued by the Director (Mines)/Additional Director (Mines), as appellate authority in the instant matter in its true letter and spirit. iii. Direct the respondents to comply with the Hon’ble High Court’s order dated 11.09.2023, and release or adjust the petitioner’s dues as per the Amnesty Scheme 2022, including refunding any excess amounts with interest. iv. Award compensation to the petitioner for the financial losses and business disruptions caused by the respondents’ non-compliance with the court orders. v. The respondents may kindly further be directed to allow the petitioner to participate in the tenders, which are already been held by the respondents and the petitioner was not able to participate on account of lack of security deposits.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite there being positive recommendations by the Government Agencies, the case of the petitioner is not being considered by the Director, Department of Mines & Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur for grant of tender, benefits under the Amnesty Scheme and refund. Learned counsel submits that the communication dated 20.01.2023 was followed by another order dated 02.02.2024 but the respondent No.2 is not deciding the case of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submits that the respondent No.2 may be directed to decide the pending matter of the petitioner for grant of tender, benefits under the Amnesty Scheme and refund in pursuance of the communication made by the Government at the earliest. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submits that the respondent No.2 may be directed to decide the pending matter of the petitioner for grant of tender, benefits under the Amnesty Scheme and refund in pursuance of the communication made by the Government at the earliest. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that case of the petitioner will be considered by the respondent No.2 for grant of tender, benefits under the Amnesty Scheme and refund at the earliest. 5. Considering the submissions made before this Court, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2-Director, Department of Mines & Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Udaipur (Rajasthan) to decide the pending matter of the petitioner for grant of tender, benefits under the Amnesty Scheme and refund in pursuance of the communication dated 20.01.2023 and order dated 02.02.2024 of the State Government expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order strictly in accordance with law. 6. The stay application and other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.