SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 2215

1997(1) Supreme 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Kuldip Singh and S. Saghir Ahmad, JJ.
Ichchapur Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. -Appellant
versus
The Competent Authority Oil & Natural Gas Commission & Anr. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 16834 of 1996
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 11606 of 1995)
Decided on 19-12-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Advocate, Sanjay Kapur, M.K. Michael, and Rajiv Kapur, Advocates.
For the Respondent : R. Sasiprabha, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Water is a mineral within the meaning of Mines Act, 1952 r/ws 2(ba) of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962.

Headnote:MINERALS-Mines Act, 1952-Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962-Sections 2(ba) and 7-Minerals-Whether Water is a mineral within the meaning of Mines Act r/ws 2(ba) ?-(Yes)-Carrying of water through new pipelines would be an act for utilisation of pipeline within the meaning of Section 7 of the Act and, therefore, permissible.

       Held that the definition of "Mineral" which has been bodily lifted from the Mines Act, 1952 and has been placed in the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 was deliberately introduced by Amending Act No.13 of 1977 so that while carrying Petroleum through the pipelines, any other minerals may also be carried through it. If, therefore, water is treated as a "Mineral" it would be permissible for the ONGC to carry it through any other pipeline without any further Notification or Declaration under Section 3 or 6 of the Act. This interpretation which is in consonance with the scientific definition of a "Mineral", serves the purpose of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right or User in Land) Act, 1962. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that "Water" should be understood in the same sense in which it is understood by a common man cannot, therefore, be accepted. This Act is an Act of Parliament intended to deal with the particular technology and the commodities involved therein. We are, therefore, of the view that in this Act, "Water" has been used in both the senses, namely, that (i) it is a mineral; and (ii) the most common, readily and freely, available substance on earth. (Para 28)

       The whole Project under the Act is a Project of national importance and, therefore, any individual inconvenience has to yield to the national interest. (Para 30)

       

JUDGMENT

S.Saghir Ahmad, J.-Leave granted.

2. Water is a mineral within the meaning of Mines Act, 1952 read with Section 2(ba) of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (for short, the Act) or not is the question raised by the respondent in this appeal.

3. Appellant owns survey plot nos. 780, 781, 913/1 914, 893, 918/223, 924/2, 923, 926 of moja Ichchapur, Tehasil Choryasi, District Surat which were notified on 23.6.83 under Section 3(1) of the Act. For acquiring the right of user in those plots to enable the respondent No. 2, namely, the Oil and Natural Gas Commission, in whom the rights were ultimately vested, to lay pipelines for transporting Petroleum from one place to another, a Notification was issued under Section 3(1) of the Act on 23.6.83. This Notification was followed by Notification dated 16.1.84 issued under Section 6(1) of the Act and the right of user in the aforesaid land stood acquired for laying the pipelines. It was also indicated in that Notification that the right of user in the said lands shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest in the Oil and Natural Gas Commission.

4. In pursuance of the aforesaid Notifications, Oil and Natural Gas Commission (for short, ONGC) laid down pipelines in the aforesaid plots of land for transportation of Petroleum from Utran Terminal to Kribhco Terminal.

5. The right of user having vested in the ONGC, they initially laid one 12" Gas pipeline through the said land (300 metres wide) for transportation of the Gas. The Gas processing plant is said to be located at Hazira and south basin. Gas is being processed at that plant since 1988 for being supplied to various consumers. In order to run the aforesaid plant efficiently and effectively, water is a commodity which is vitally required. Water was initially drawn for that purpose from KRBC canal division but when ONGC was informed that no further water would be made available from the canals due to Kakarprra Irrigation Project, the ONGC decided to draw water from the alternative sources through their own pipelines which they thought they would lay down underneath the land of which the right of user had already vested in them. Accordingly, a notice dated 6.10.94 was issued under Section 8 of the Act for laying pipelines to carry water for effective working of the Gas processing plant. The pipeline was to pass through a stretch of land of 13 Kms. out of which the land owners/occupiers of 11 Kms. did not raise any objection whatsoever but the appellant who is concerned only with 2 Kms. of land challenged the notice on the ground that the proposed pipelines were not being laid for transporting petroleum or any other mineral but for transporting water which was not permissible under the Act. This contention has been rejected by the Gujarat High Court which was of the opinion that the action of ONGC in laying down the proposed pipeline for transporting water was fully covered by the provisions of the Act specially as the right of user of the land through which the pipeline was proposed to be carried had already vested in the ONGC.

6. The appellant has again raised this question in this appeal while ONGC has raised an additional ground that "Water" for which the pipelines have been laid is a mineral and since "Minerals" could be validly carried through those pipelines, "Water" could also be carried or transported through them.

7. Whether "Water" is a mineral or not was not decided by the High Court as it was of the opinion that carrying of water through the pipelines would be covered by the phrase "any other act necessary for the utilisation of the pipeline" used in Section 7(1)(ii) of the Act on the simple logic that :-

(i) Pipelines earlier laid were meant, and, are being utilised for transportation of Gas.

(ii) This Gas is processed at the Gas processing plant.

(iii) For running of Gas processing plant, water is necessary otherwi





















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top