Judgment

RAGHUBAR DAYAL, J. : (On behalf of himself, K. Subba Rao, CJI., and S. M. Sikri, J.) These three appeals, by special leave, are directed against the orders of the Central Government dated January 18, 1962, on applications for revision under R. 7 of the Mining Leases (Modification of Terms) Rules, 1956, hereinafter called the 1956 rules, in respect of the orders passed by the Controller of Mining Leases, Nagpur, on July 1, 1961, in Cases Nos. H-317, H-317A and H-317B.

2. The appeals arise thus. On August 11, 1928, Raja Ban Bahadur Singh of Palganj, in Bihar, executed a lease with respect to a certain area of his estate in favour of Babu Tribang Murani Chakravarti of Asansol for a period of 49 years for the purpose of carrying out mining operations in the said area for soap stone, kaoline etc. Chakravarti, the head lessee, executed a sub-lease in favour of Deoji Jairam Solanki on May 18, 1933. Solanki, in his turn, granted a sub-lease in respect of the same area in favour of M/s. Hirji Premji Parmar and Brothers on May 18, 1934. On October 18, 1954, M/s. Hirji Premji Parmar and Brothers, assigned their right, title and interest in the said area in favour of the appellants, the Bihar Mines Ltd., Calcutta, for a period of 19 years and 7 months expiring on May 17, 1974.

3. The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Act XXX of 1950), hereinafter called the Reforms Act, came in to force on September 25, 1952. On July 13, 1952, the Government of Bihar issued a notification under sub-s. (1) of S. 3 declaring that the estate of Palganj passed to and became vested in the State. On January 26, 1955, the State Government issued notification under S. 3A of the Reforms Act declaring that the intermediary interests of all intermediaries in the whole estate had passed to and become vested in the State. Clrakravarti s mining rights in the area comprised in the lease became subject to the provisions of S. 10 of the Reforms Act.

4. In 1948, the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1948 (Central Act LIII of 1948), hereinafter called the 1948 Act, was enacted for the regulation of Mines. Section 4 (1) of this Act provided that no mining leases would be granted after the commencement of the Act otherwise than in accordance with the rules made under that Act. Sub-s. (2) provided that any mining leases granted contrary to sub-s. (1) would be void and of no effect. Section 5 empowered the Central Government to make rules for regulating the grant of mining leases in respect of any mineral or in any area. Section 7 empowered the Central Government to make rules for the purpose of modifying and altering the terms and conditions of any mining leases granted prior to the commencement of the Act so as to bring such leases into conformity with the rules made under S. 5.

5. The Mineral Concession Rules, 1949, hereinafter called the 1949 rules, were made by the Central Government in the exercise of its powers under S. 5 of the 1948 Act. The 1956 rules were made by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under S. 7. Rule 6 of the 1956 rules empowered the Controller of Mining Leases, after following the prescribed procedure, to modify any existing mining lease so as to bring it in conformity with the 1948 Act and the 1949 rules.

6. The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (Act LXVII of 1957), hereinafter called the 1957 Act, repealed the 1948 Act. In view of its S. 29, the l956 rules continued to be effective.

7. The Controller of Mines took action for the modification of the head lease dated August 11, 1928, and the sub-lease executed in favour of Solanki and Hirji Premji Parmar and Brothers in 1933 and 1934 respectively. Notice was issued to the appellants of the proposed modifications. The appellants, however, do not admit having received the notice of the modifications of the sub-leases. They admit the receipt of the notice for the modification of the head lease. They appeared before the Controller and raised objections