1968 Supreme(Pat) 106

PATNA HIGH COURT
A.B.N.Sinha and Krishna Ballabh Sinha JJ.
Bokaro, Ramgur Ltd.
Versus
Kathara Coal Co.Ltd.
Appeal From Original Order No. 99 of 1961 ; 115 of 1961 ; 116 of 1961 ;
Decided On : MAY 17, 1968

The words "rights under a mining lease" as occurring in the opening sentence of Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 were descriptive of the property acquired and not of any particular lease that might be in operation at the time of acquisition.

Headnote:

COAL BEARING AREAS (ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1957 - SECTIONS 4, 8, 9, 13, 14, 20, 28 - LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - SECTIONS 4(1) - BIHAR LAND REFORMS ACT, 1950 - SECTIONS 10, 10A - MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1949 - RULES 28, 29, 36 - COMPENSATION FOR ACQUISITION OF MINING RIGHTS - DETERMINATION - PRINCIPLES - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES.

Fact of the Case:

The Government of India issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, acquiring land for prospecting of coal seams. Before any further action could be taken, the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (the Act) came into force. The Act was amended by Act 51 of 1957, which amended Sections 13 and 28 and inserted Section 9A. The Central Government issued a notification under Section 9 of the Act, declaring the acquisition of lands and rights to mine, quarry, bore, dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals. Possession of the lands and rights was taken on behalf of the Government of India. The Central Government assessed the compensation for the acquisition of the mining rights. A dispute arose as to the right to receive the compensation amount amongst three claimants, namely, M/s. Kathara Coal Company Ltd. (Kathara Coal), M/s. Bokaro & Ramgur Ltd. (Bokaro & Ramgur) and Shri Narayan Prasad Kedia. A Tribunal was constituted under Section 14(2) of the Act and the dispute was referred to the Tribunal for adjudication. The Tribunal determined the amount of compensation and apportioned the same. Bokaro & Ramgur, Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh and the Union of India filed appeals against the award of the Tribunal. Kathara Coal filed a memorandum of cross-objection.

Finding of the Court:

1. The reference petition mentioned the particulars of the reference, including the entire land covered under the Notification issued under Section 9 of the Act. The Tribunal erred in holding that the reference was confined to the mining rights in 3200 bighas only. The reference was also in respect of the 1475.56 bighas of lands acquired. 2. The appellant company, Bokaro & Ramgur, had no interest in the 1475.56 bighas of lands acquired, and, as such, no claim was sustainable at their instance. 3. The sub-lease in favour of Kathara Coal was not wiped off and had not been substituted by a new lease by virtue of Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. The sub-lessee did not get any new sub-lease under Section 10, his lease subsisted by virtue of the statutory grant in favour of his lessor under Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. 4. The words "rights under a mining lease" as occurring in the opening sentence of Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Act were descriptive of the property acquired and not of any particular lease that might be in operation at the time of acquisition. Sub-section (2) of Section 13 on a proper construction was not intended to cover only statutory leases as are contemplated under Sections 9 and 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. 5. The Tribunal did not err in allowing compensation to Kathara Coal for minimum royalty at the rate of Rs. 7/8/- per bigha per year upto June, 1957 and at the rate of Rs. 10.00 per bigha for the period from 1-7-1957 to 23-11-1957, the date of the acquisition.

Issues: 1. Whether the reference was confined to the mining rights in 3200 bighas only or it also included the 1475.56 bighas of lands acquired? 2. Whether the appellant company, Bokaro & Ramgur, had any interest in the 1475.56 bighas of lands acquired? 3. Whether the sub-lease in favour of Kathara Coal was wiped off and had been substituted by a new lease by virtue of Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act? 4. Whether the words "rights under a mining lease" as occurring in the opening sentence of Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Act were descriptive of the property acquired and not of any particular lease that might be in operation at the time of acquisition? 5. Whether the Tribunal erred in allowing compensation to Kathara Coal for minimum royalty at the rate of Rs. 7/8/- per bigha per year upto June, 1957 and at the rate of Rs. 10.00 per bigha for the period from 1-7-1957 to 23-11-1957, the date of the acquisition?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The reference petition mentioned the particulars of the reference, including the entire land covered under the Notification issued under Section 9 of the Act. The Tribunal erred in holding that the reference was confined to the mining rights in 3200 bighas only. The reference was also in respect of the 1475.56 bighas of lands acquired. 2. The appellant company, Bokaro & Ramgur, had no interest in the 1475.56 bighas of lands acquired, and, as such, no claim was sustainable at their instance. 3. The sub-lease in favour of Kathara Coal was not wiped off and had not been substituted by a new lease by virtue of Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. The sub-lessee did not get any new sub-lease under Section 10, his lease subsisted by virtue of the statutory grant in favour of his lessor under Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. 4. The words "rights under a mining lease" as occurring in the opening sentence of Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Act were descriptive of the property acquired and not of any particular lease that might be in operation at the time of acquisition. Sub-section (2) of Section 13 on a proper construction was not intended to cover only statutory leases as are contemplated under Sections 9 and 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. 5. The Tribunal did not err in allowing compensation to Kathara Coal for minimum royalty at the rate of Rs. 7/8/- per bigha per year upto June, 1957 and at the rate of Rs. 10.00 per bigha for the period from 1-7-1957 to 23-11-1957, the date of the acquisition.

Final Decision: All the three appeals and the cross-objection were dismissed.