( 1. ) THE above batch of writ appeals are directed against the order dated 7th August, 2008 made in writ petition No. 21608 of 2005, raising the following core issues for our consideration:

(i) Whether it is proper for this Court to exercise its power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of india to adjudicate on the policy decision with respect to substantial development of the State and quash the notification made under Rule 59 (1) of the Mineral concession Rules, 1960 (for short 'mc Rules') notifying the area available for mining iron ore?

(ii) Whether the application, for grant of mining lease for an area, without a notification under Rule 59 (1) of the MC rules, 1960 notifying the said area as available for mining, can be considered for grant of mining lease under Section 11 (2) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and regulation) Act, 1957, (for short 'mmdr Act') as, such application is premature and shall not be entertained as per Rule 60 of the MC Rules, 1960 ? and

(iii) Whether granting mining lease in consideration of Rule 35 of the MC Rules falls outside the purview of the matters specified under Section 11 (3) of the MMDR Act?

( 2. ) THE factual matrix of the case which led the first respondent herein (writ petitioner) to file Writ Petition No. 21608 of 2005, is as hereunder:

2. 1. The first respondent herein (writ petitioner), is a public limited company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It has industries in mining, power generation through non- conventional energy sources and industrial gases. It also proposes to set up an iron and steel plant. Hence, it made an application on 24th May, 2001 to the Director of Mines and geology for grant of mining lease of iron ore over an extent of 298. 5 hectares, in Eddinpada, which is known as Kumaraswamy Range Forest, sandur Taluk, Bellary District.

2. 2. The said-extent of land viz., 298. 5 hectares was previously held under a mining lease by M/s. Sandur Manganese and Iron Ore Limited thereinafter referred to as 'smiore'] since 1950 and thereafter, surrendered to the State.

2. 3. As per Rule 59 (1) of the MC Rules, no area, which was previously held or which is being held under a reconnaissance permit or a prospecting licence or a mining lease, shall be available for grant, unless- (i) an entry to that effect is made in the Register under Rule 7d (2), 21 (2) and 40 (2) of the MC Rules, and (ii) the availability of the area for grant is notified in the official gazette, as provided under Rule 59 (1) of the MC Rules.

2. 4. However, Rule 59 (2) empowers the Central Government to relax the provisions of Rule 59 (1) for reasons to be recorded in writing, in any special case.

2. 5. The State Government, therefore, by its letter dated 30th August, 2001, on receipt of the request made by the first respondent herein (writ petitioner) dated 24th May, 2001, requested the Central Government to relax the conditions set out in Rule 59 (1) of the Rules in favour of the first respondent herein (writ petitioner), exercising the powers under Rule 59 (2)of the MC Rules.

2. 6. When the said recommendation was under consideration of the central Government, one Zia Ulla Shariff, who was also an applicant for grant of mining lease over a part of the same area, i. e. 298. 5 hectares, in kumaraswamy Range Forest in Sandur Taluk, filed W. P. No. 35915 of 2001 before this Court, seeking for a declaration that he is entitled for grant of mining lease in his favour. In the said Writ Petition No. 35915 of 2001, Zia Ulla Shariff impleaded the first respondent herein (writ petitioner) as well as the Union of India as respondents.

2. 7. However, the Central Government, by letter dated 21st December, 2001, returned all the proposals pending before it, including the application filed by the first respondent herein (writ petitioner), to the State government for resubmitting them after undertaking a Regional environment Impact Assessment based on the carrying capacity of t