Judgment

UNTWALIA, J. :- This is a plaintiff s appeal by special leave of this Court from the judgment and decree of the Rajasthan High Court whereby the plaintiff s second appeal from the decision of the First Appellate Court was dismissed and the dismissal of its suit was maintained.

2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and may usefully be stated at the outset. The plaintiff was granted a mining lease for mining mica by the erstwhile State of Shahpura for a period of 20 years commencing from the 12th August, 1941. The area of the lease purported to be 1500 sq. miles. In due course the mining area in question came to form part of the State of Rajasthan. The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 - hereinafter called the Act - came into force from 1st June, 1953. Under Section 6 (1) of the Act as it stood at the relevant time the area of a mining lease in the case of mica could not be more than 10 sq. miles and its maximum period could not exceed 20 years as provided in Sec. 8. Section 16 confers power on the appropriate authority to modify a mining lease granted before 24th October, 1949 to bring it in conformity with the Act and the Rules made thereunder. In exercise of this power and in accordance with the Mining Leases (Modifications of Terms) Rules, l956 the Controller of Mica Leases, Nagaur, reduced the mining area of the appellant s lease to 10 sq. miles by his order dated November 20, 1959. As per Rule 10 (1) (a) of the said Rules a compensation of Rs. 10/- only was fixed by agreement between the parties for reduction of the area, and by the same order the dead rent at the rate of Rs. 8/- per acre per annum fixed by the original lease was reduced to Rs. 6/- per acre. The period of 20 years of the original lease came to an end on August 11, 1961. The appellant applied to the Government of Rajasthan for renewal of its lease for another 20 years. This was done in accordance with Rule 28 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 -hereinafter called the Rules. The Government of Rajasthan granted the renewal by order dated December 13, 1961 for a period of 20 years with effect from August 12, 1961. The dead rent fixed for the renewed lease was Rs. 20/- per hectare which comes to Rs. 8/- per acre. The appellant challenged the order of the Government of Rajasthan by filing a revision before the Central Government in accordance with Rule 54 of the Rules. But the revision was dismissed. Thereupon it filed a suit against the Union of India, respondent no. 1 and the State of Rajasthan, respondent no. 2 for a decree of injunction to restrain the defendants from charging dead rent at the rate of Rs. 8/- per acre per annum and for a declaration that they are entitled to charge only at the rate of Rs. 6/- per acre. The suit was decreed by the Trial Court but was dismissed by the First Appellate Court. The dismissal was maintained by the High Court in second appeal.

3. Mr. Y. S. Chitlay, learned counsel for the appellant, pressed the following five points in support of this appeal:

(1) Under the agreement dated 20-11-1959 the lease was to be governed by the Act and the Rules except in regard to dead rent which was fixed at Rs. 6/- per acre.

(2) Under Rule 28 of the Rules, the State Government while renewing the lease had power to reduce the area but no power to increase the dead rent.

(3) Rule 27 does not apply to renewal of a lease.

(4) Clause (c) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 27 is ultra vires as it transgresses the rule making power under Section 13 (2) (g) of the Act.

(5) Rule 27 (1) (c) if made applicable to renewal of a mining lease introduces an element of uncertainty and is therefore void.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents combated the appellant s argument in all respects. In our opinion none of he contentions put forward on behalf of the appellant is fit to be accepted and the appeal must fail.

5. As is well settled the power to make rules for regulating the grant of prospecting licenses and mining leases in re