Point of Law: There was a specific notification issued on 10th June 2011 by the Director of Mines and Geology in exercise of the powers under Section 5 read with Section 8 of the said Act of 1957 of grant of mining lease

ORDER :

Abhay S. Oka, J.

Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

2. The main issue which arises for consideration is whether the application made by the petitioner for grant of prospecting licence on 16th June 2011 was rendered ineligible in view of sub-section(1) of Section 10-A of the Mines and Minerals(Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short 'the said Act of 1957').

3. Few facts which are relevant need to be mentioned. As stated earlier, an application for grant of prospecting licence was made by the petitioner on 16th June 2011 in respect of an area of 2,400 acres, more particularly described in the petition in respect of lime stone. The application was in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9(1) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (for short, “the said Rules of 1960”). There were other applications made by other parties. There was overlapping of areas claimed by the petitioner and other applicants. The case made out in the petition is that on 9th January 2015, the Director of Mines and Geology vide his order (Annexure-H) allowed the application subject to obtaining relaxation from the State Government in exercise of the powers under the proviso to clause (c) of subsection (1) of Section 6 of the said Act of 1957. While passing the said order, the Director observed that after deleting the overlapping area, the application of the petitioner can be considered in respect of an area of 2,114.04 acres. However, he further observed the area of 2,114.04 acres was not a contiguous block and therefore, an order of relaxation by the State Government was necessary. The petitioner is relying upon the letter dated 3rd February 2015 addressed by the Director of Mines and Geology Department to the Secretary to the State Government which records that the application was allowed.

4. On 21st March 2017, the petitioner wrote a letter seeking execution of the lease deed based on the order dated 9th January 2015. Subsequently, a notice was served upon the petitioner calling upon him to show cause why the application for prospecting licence should not be rejected for noncompliance of Clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 10-A of the said Act of 1957. After hearing the petitioner, the impugned order at Annexure-A was passed on 10th June 2020 holding that the application dated 16th June 2011 was not disposed of by an order dated 9th January 2015 and was thus pending on 12th January 2015 and therefore, it was rendered ineligible in view of sub-section (1) of Section 10-A of the said Act of 1957 which came into force with effect from 12th January 2015.

5. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner firstly pointed out the Notification dated 27th May 1995 (Annexure-J). He pointed out that by the said notification issued in exercise of the power under sub-section (2) of Section 26 of the said Act of 1957, the powers of the State Government to dispose of the applications for grant/renewal of prospecting licences was delegated to the Director of Mines and Geology (for short “the Director”) He pointed out that if the order dated 9th January 2015 is considered as a whole, it is clear that the Director has granted the application subject to the State Government granting relaxation under the provisions of proviso to clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act of 1957. He submitted that it is clearly pointed out in the letter dated 3rd February 2015 at Annexure-K that the application was granted. He would, therefore, submit that the application made by the petitioner was not pending on 12th January 2015 and therefore the application was not rendered ineligible. He submitted that all that is now required to be done is the execution of a lease deed after the Government grants relaxation. He also invited our attention to the provisions of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 and in particular Rule 63A which fixes a time fr