Judgment

HEGDE, J.: - On June 24, 1959, the Deputy Commissioner Santal Parganas caused a notice dated June 20, 1959 published in the Bihar Gazette in accordance with the provisions of Rule 67 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1949, of the availability for regrant of mining rights in respect of fireclay over the whole of village Palasthali No. 39, situate in Thana Hala, Block Kasta, Sub-Division Jamtara in the District of Santal Parganas. He announced in that notice that the said area will be available for regrant with effect from August 1, 1959 and invited applications for grant of mining lease in respect of that area in accordance with the provisions of Mineral Concession Rules, 1949. The appellant, a partnership firm applied for that lease on June 24, 1959 itself. Thereafter other persons including the 5th respondent Nathu Singh also applied for obtaining the lease in question. The State Government of Bihar granted the lease to the appellant on March 31, 1962 In pursuance of that grant a written agreement was entered into between the State Govermnent and the appellant and the same was duly registered. The State Government rejected the applications of the other applicants. Even during the pendency of the applications before the State Government the 5th respondent moved the Central Government under rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 which had replaced the 1949 Rules. Therein he prayed that the grant of the lease in favour of the appellant, if it had been made, should be cancelled and that he should be granted the mineral lease in question. The Central Government served a copy of that petition on the appellant and called for its comments. At the same time it called for the comments of the State Government as well. After receiving the comments of the State Government, the same were passed on to the appellant as well as to the 5th respondent and their further comments were called for. After examining the representation made by the parties and the comments offered by the State Government, the Central Government dismissed the petition made by the 5th respondent on September 30, 1964. The Order of the Central Government reads thus :

Government of India

Ministry of Steel & Mines,

(Department of Mines and Metals)

No MV-1 (569)/61 New Delhi, the 30th Septr., 1964

From

Shri A Nabar

Under Secretary to the Government of India

To

Shri Nankhu Singh,

P. O. Churulia, Distt. Burdwan

(West Bengal)

Subject: Application under rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 in respect of Mining lease for fire-clay over 248 acres in Mouza Palasthali, P S. Nala, Distt Santal Parganas

Sir,

I am directed to refer to your application dated 17-10-1961 on the above subject and to say that after careful consideration the Central Government hereby reject your revision application as being time-barred.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/- A. Nabar,

Under Secretary to the Government of India."

2. Thereafter the Central Government passed a further order on November 5, 1964 and that order reeds thus:

"Registered A/D

Government of India

Ministry of Steel and Mines

(Department of Mines and Metals}

No. MV-1 (569)/61 New Delhi, the 5th November, 1964.

From

Shri H. S. Sahni

Under Secretary to the Government of India

To

The Secretary to the Government of Bihar,

Department of Mines and Geology, Patna.

Subject : Revision application under rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 from Shri Nankoo Singh relating to Mining lease for Fire-clay over 248 acres in Santal Pargana District.

Sir,

In continuation of this Ministry s letter of even number dated 30 9-1964 on the above subject, I am directed to say that since no entry in the standard register was made as required under former rule 67 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1949, the area could not have been held to be available and the four applications (referred to in para 2 of the State Government s letter no. 3181/M, dated 9-6-1962) would be deemed to be premature and should have been rejected on that ground alone.

Even assuming that the notification