JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.-The writ petitioner before the High Court is appellant herein.

2. Admitted fact of the matter is as under:

An auction for grant of mining operation that is for extraction of mineral sand in Bega Murthal comprising 56 villages in the district of Sonepat in the State of Haryana was held on 6.4.1998. The reserved price therefor was fixed at Rs. 83,23,000/- (Rupees eighty three lacs twenty three thousand only). The appellant herein became the highest bidder, the bid amount being Rs. 1,48,00,000/- (Rupees one crore forty eight lacs) per annum for the period 11th October, 1998 to 31st March, 2001. The said bid was accepted and pursuant to and in furtherance thereof an agreement was entered into by and between the parties on 30th October, 1998. The appellant herein deposited an amount of Rs. 37,00,000/- (Rupees thirty seven lacs) as security.

3. The relevant clauses of the said agreement are as under :

"9. Payments of Compensations to land owners :-

The contractor shall make and pay reasonable satisfaction and compensation for all damages or disturbance which may be done by him in exercise of the powers granted by this contract and shall indemnify and keep indemnify fully and completely the Government against all claims which may be made by any person or persons in respect of any such damage, injury or disturbance and costs any expenses in connection therewith.

17. Termination of the contract by State Government in public interest:-

Except as otherwise provided, the contract may be terminated by Govt. if considerable by it to be in public interest, by giving one month s notice.

Provided that in the state of national emergency or war contract may be terminated without giving such notice.

18. Recovery of contract money as arrears of land revenue:-

Any sum from the contractors on account of contract money in respect of the contract, shall be recovered from him/them as arrears of land revenue.

18A. The contractor shall have no right to seek any relief in payment of contract money on the plea that he was not able to extract sand from any village falling in the zone.

27. Acquisition of land of third parties and compensation thereof:-

In accordance with provisions of clause 9 of this agreement the contractor shall offer to pay compensation to an occupier or owner of the surface of the land where from the minor mineral will be raised, including the land required for use as access to the quarry/mine, stacking of mineral and purpose subsidiary there to for any damage or injury which may arise from the proposed mining operations of the contractor and in case the said occupier or owner refuses his consent to the exercise or the rights and powers reserved to the government and demised to the contractor under these presents the contractor shall report the matter to the Assistant Mining Engineer/Mining Officer posted in the District who shall request the collector of the District concerned to direct the occupier or the owners on such mining/quarrying operations as may be necessary for the working of the mine/quarry on deposit with the collector to the occupier or the owner by the contractor subject to its final fixation by the collector under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894."

4. The contention of the appellant was that in terms of clauses 9 and 27, he approached the land owners of villages Nandnaur, Larsauli, Pipli Khera, Murthal and Bhigan for settlement of compensation, but, they did not accede thereto. Thereafter, the appellant requested respondent No. 3 to get the amount of compensation determined by the District Collector and pay the same to the land owners but no response thereto was made. Further contention of the appellant is that although in the aforementioned situation he has not been able to extract sand even for a day, he had deposited a huge sum of Rs. 2,12,07,573/- (Rupees two crores twelve lacs seven thousand five hundred seventy three only). The appellant further urged that having regard to the said conduct on the part of