The main legal point established in the judgment is that the entitlement to mining lease and the transfer of prospecting license must comply with the requirements of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. The judgment also clarified the rights of the proprietor of a mining entity in comparison to a partnership Firm.

JUDGMENT

Avinash G. Gharote, J. - The petition as initially filed, sought a direction to the respondent no.1 to take a decision forthwith in respect of grant of mining lease and its execution before 11/1/2017 in favour of the petitioner - M/s Ajanta Minerals, a registered partnership Firm. The proceedings before the State Government came to be decided by the impugned order dated 8/6/2017, whereby, the Minister Industries, Mining State of Maharashtra, in exercise of the power conferred upon the State Government by Section 10-A (2) (c) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short, "The MMDR Act, 1957, hereinafter), and Rule 8 (2) of the Minerals (Other Than Atomic And Hydrocarbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016 (for short, "the MC Rules, 2016", hereinafter), has decided that M/s Ajanta Minerals a proprietary Firm, is entitled for grant of mining lease over an area of 65 hectares in village Sohale, Tq. Korchi, District Gadchiroli, subject to the result of the present petition, consequent to which the petition has been amended to challenge the order dated 8/6/2017. Further direction has been sought to conduct an enquiry through the CID to investigate in respect of prospecting license of M/s Ajanta Minerals, dated 10/10/2005, which is claimed to be in custody of the respondent no.2.

2. The following position is not disputed: -

(A) That M/s Ajanta Minerals, was the proprietary concern of the respondent no.2, who had applied for its registration as a proprietary Firm on 13/11/1995, and was accordingly granted a provisional certificate of registration as a proprietary Firm.

(B) The respondent no.2 as a proprietor of "Ajanta Minerals" had applied for prospecting license on 9/12/1998.

(C) The Grampanchayat had granted NOC/ permission for mining the land in favour of the proprietorship concern on 5/10/1999.

(D) All communications till 31/12/2004, in respect of the prospecting license in favour of M/s Ajanta Minerals a proprietary concern, were between the various authorities and the respondent no.2 alone.

3. Mr. Ram Parsodkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner takes exception to the finding as rendered in the impugned order, that it is the proprietary Firm M/s Ajanta Minerals and not a partnership Firm Ajanta Minerals, who is entitled for grant of mining lease.

4. It is the contention of Mr. Ram Parsodkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, that a partnership came into existence, on 1/8/2005, where under, the proprietorship concern M/s Ajanta Minerals, came to be converted into a partnership Firm, with the respondent no.2, along with (a) Shri Ghanshyam Wasudeorao Tijare and (b) Shri Madhukar Sheshraoji Kale as partners, wherein, the contribution of the respondent no.2, as a share capital to the Firm, was the prospecting license, issued in the name of the proprietary concern M/s Ajanta Minerals and the benefits arising out of it. The said partnership Firm came to be reconstituted on 1/8/2005 by adding Shri Rajendra Purushottam Tank, as a partner and the partnership Firm came to be registered on 10/2/2009, with the Registrar of Firms. The partnership is at Will and is still continuing. He further submits that in anticipation to the partnership Firm M/s Ajanta Minerals being formed, a power of attorney, came to be executed by the respondent no.2, in favour of one of the partners of the Firm, namely, Shri Ghanshyam Tijare on 11/12/2004, in pursuance to which it is contended, that the said attorney, initiated proceedings, for change of the constitution of the Firm from proprietorship to partnership, in the prospecting license, with the authorities under Rule 62 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (for short "the MC Rules, 1960" hereinafter), for which, he relies upon the communication dated 22/9/2005, addressed by Shri Ghanshyam Tijare as an attorney of the respondent no.2, to the Mining Officer, on the subject of addition of the partner's name in the agreement/deed/order No.piv-gt/31/05/2361 dated 14/7/200