The interpretation of various provisions of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, particularly Sections 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, 15, 16, and 20, in the context of compensation for the acquisition of a mining lease.

Untwalia, J.

1. This is a miscellaneous first appeal filed by the claimant -- the East India Coal Company Limited -- under Sec.20 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the Act). A certain mining lease in respect of land measuring 700 bighas and odd in Sutikdih was acquired under the Act and the proceeding was initiated by issuance of a preliminary notification under Sec. 4 of the Act. Eventually, a declaration of acquisition under Section 9 was issued on 18-12-61. On the issuance of such a declaration, the land and rights in the Sutikdih Colliery vested in the Central Government under Sec.10. The Central Government under Sec.10. The Central Government determined the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 36,449-83 payable to the claimant. The claimant did not agree to this amount and accepted the payment under protest. It filed its claim before the Tribunal appointed under the Act and as against its claim put forward before the Central Government to the tune of Rs. 19,35,902.03, it out forward a claim of Rs. 14,79,149/-before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has considered the matter in detail and allowed a total compensation of Rs. 3,37,929.52. It thus allowed an extra amount of Rs. 3.01,479.69 including interest under Sec.13 (2) (iv) of the Act. The claimant has filed this appeal to claim more amount of compensation under some head, interest under Sec.16 of the Act on the extra sum of compensation allowed or to be allowed and costs under Sec.15 in respect of the reference. The respondent, namely, the Central Government, on service of a notice of appeal filed a cross-objection objecting to the awarding of certain items of compensation to the appellant.

2. The learned Advocate-General appearing in support of the appeal urged five points--

(i) That compensation under Sec.13 (4) of the Act also ought to have been awarded and the Tribunal has not done it.

(ii) That it is compulsory for the Tribunal to award interest in accordance with Sec.16 pr in any event without exercise of judicial discretion and without mentioning any valid around interest under Sec.16 could not be disallowed.

(iii) That cost ought to have been allowed under Sec.15 of the Act.

(iv) That certain items of compensation claimed by the appellant have wrongly been disallowed by the Tribunal.

(v) That the cross-objection filed by the respondent is not maintainable and cannot be entertained.

3. The first point urged on behalf of the appellant is not sound and must be rejected. When a notification under Sec. 4 is issued then the effect of such notification on prospecting licences and mining leases is provided in Sec. 5. Clause (b) which reads as follows--

"On the issue of a notification under Sub-section (1) of Sec. 4 in respect of any land -- X X X

(b) any mining lease shall, in so far as it authorises the lessee or any person claiming through him to undertake any operation in the land, cease to have effect for so lone as the notification under that sub-section is in force."

If land in respect of which notification under Sec. 4 has been issued is not acquired within the maximum period of three years then under Section 7 (2) of the Act the notification issued under Sub-section (1) of Sec. 4 ceases to have effect on the expiration of three years from the date thereof. If, however, within the said period a declaration of acquisition is made under Section 9 then there is no question of the effect of notification ceasing or the effect under Section 5 (b) coming to an end. In that event the land vests in the Central Government and becomes its property. When land is acquired then under Sec.13 (2) (iii) the expenditure, if any, incurred by wav of dead rent or minimum royalty during any year or years when there was no production of coal is fully paid irrespective of the question whether the non-production of coal was because of the mining operations not going on or because of the effect brought about under Sec. 5 (b) of th