As per case facts, Petitioner challenged 2004 demand notices for surface rent on sand mining leases, alleging natural justice violations, vagueness, and that the demand (based on 1962/1965 executive instructions ... at commercial rates) exceeded "land revenue" under Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. Petitioner also raised frivolous pleas about lease deeds and royalty. Respondent stated numerous prior notices were ignored and the demand adhered to statutory rules, applying minimum rent rates from valid executive instructions, which are considered land revenue post-Zamindari abolition. The question arose whether the demand for surface rent was valid under Rule 27(1)(d) and principles of natural justice, given the executive instructions and the Petitioner's conduct. Finally, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition, finding Petitioner's arguments without merit. Natural justice was not violated, and the demand conformed to land revenue rates established by valid executive instructions, which were deemed applicable and not ultra vires.