The management of all coal mines, as defined in the Coal Mines (Taking Over of Management) Ordinance, 1973, vested in the Central Government on the appointed day under Section 3(1) of the Ordinance. However, if any other mine came into existence as a result of mining operations after the appointed day, the vesting clause in Section 3(1) would not apply to such coal mines and a declaration had to be made under the proviso to Section 3(2) for the management of such mines to vest in the Central Government.

Headnote:
COAL MINES (TAKING OVER OF MANAGEMENT) ORDINANCE, 1973 - MANAGEMENT OF COAL MINES - VESTING IN CENTRAL GOVERNMENT - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 3 - AD INTERIM ORDER FOR RESTORATION OF POSSESSION - REFUSED.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a coal mining company, challenged the legality of the Coal Mines (Taking Over of Management) Ordinance, 1973, which vested the management of certain coal mines in the Central Government. The petitioner's colliery was not included in the schedule of mines mentioned in the Ordinance or in a subsequent declaration issued by the Central Government. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the respondents from giving effect to the Ordinance in relation to its colliery and to direct the respondents to deliver back possession and management of the colliery to the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the management of all coal mines, as defined in the Ordinance, vested in the Central Government on the appointed day under Section 3(1) of the Ordinance. However, if any other mine came into existence as a result of mining operations after the appointed day, the vesting clause in Section 3(1) would not apply to such coal mines and a declaration had to be made under the proviso to Section 3(2) for the management of such mines to vest in the Central Government.
Issues: 1. Whether the management of all coal mines vested in the Central Government on the appointed day under Section 3(1) of the Ordinance, or only the management of the coal mines mentioned in the schedule or declared subsequently by notification under the proviso to Section 3(2)? 2. Whether the court had the power to direct the restoration of status quo ante in a proper case?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Section 3 of the Ordinance to mean that the management of all coal mines, as defined in the Ordinance, vested in the Central Government on the appointed day under Section 3(1). However, if any other mine came into existence as a result of mining operations after the appointed day, the vesting clause in Section 3(1) would not apply to such coal mines and a declaration had to be made under the proviso to Section 3(2) for the management of such mines to vest in the Central Government. 2. The court held that it had the power to direct the restoration of status quo ante in a proper case.
Final Decision: The court refused to grant an ad interim order for the restoration of possession of the petitioner's colliery, as it held that the view it had taken in the matter was only prima facie.

( 1 ) THIS application has been made for the issue of a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forbear from giving any effect to the Coal Mines (Taking Over of Management) Ordinance, 1973, in relation to the Chhatabar Colliery of the petitioner situated in Mouza Chhatabar. P. S. Nirsha in the district of Dhanbad. The application also seeks for the issue of a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents Nos. 1 to 8 to deliver back possession and management of the said Colliery to the petitioner. Rule nisi in terms of the aforesaid prayers was directed to be issued by me and I passed also at the time of the issue of the rule nisi certain ad interim orders which need not be mentioned now.

( 2 ) MR. R. C. Deb appearing for the petitioners also prayed for an ad interim order directing the respondents Nos. 1 to 8 to restore back the possession of the said Colliery to the petitioners. At the time of the issue of the Rule I did not pass the said ad interim order but gave liberty to the petitioner to apply for the said ad interim order upon notice to the respondents.

( 3 ) PURSUANT to the said liberty Mr. Deb, upon notice to the respondents for whom the learned Advocate-General of West Bengal appears, applied for the said ad interim order for restoration of possession of the said Colliery to the petitioners.

( 4 ) THE petitioner No. 1 is the said New Chhatabar Coal Co. Ltd. (which will be referred to as 'the said Company' hereinafter ). The shareholders and Directors of the said company are citizens of India. The company owns a colliery known as Chhatabar Colliery situate in Mouza Chhatabar, P. S. Nirsha in the district of Dhanbad, as stated hereinabove.

( 5 ) ON or about January 30, 1973 the President of India in exercise of his powers under Article 123 (l) of the Constitution of India promulgated an Ordinance known as The Coal Mines (Taking Over of Management) Ordinance, 1973 (referred to as 'the said Ordinance' hereinafter) for the purpose of taking over the management of coal mines containing coal pending the nationalisation of the said mines. The said Ordinance came into effect on January 31, 1973. In the schedule to the said Ordinance the names of 468 coal mines have been mentioned. The name of the said Chhatabar Colliery has not been mentioned in the said schedule.

( 6 ) SUBSEQUENTLY the Central Government in exercise of powers under Section 3 (2) of the said Ordinance has issued a declaration and published another schedule mentioning therein the names of further 208 coal mines. The said declaration was published and gazetted on February 8, 1973. Nonetheless the name of the said Colliery has not been included even in the said subsequent declaration and the schedule published as mentioned above. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, the respondents Nos. 1 to 8 have taken possession of the said colliery.

( 7 ) MR. R. C. Deb appearing for the petitioners submitted :-- (1) Under the said Ordinance management of the Coal Mines which have been mentioned in the schedule to the said Ordinance, on the appointed day vested in the Central Government. (2) Under the provisions of Section 3 (2) of the said Ordinance further 208 collieries mentioned in the subsequent declaration would be deemed to be included in the said schedule and management thereof has vested on the date of such declaration in the Central Government. (3) Management of a Colliery not included in the schedule to the Ordinance, nor declared in terms of Sub-section (2) to Section 3 of the Ordinance has not vested in the Central Government. (4) The Ordinance did not empower nor authorise the Central Government or the Custodian to take over possession of any colliery even if included in the schedule to the Ordinance or included in a subsequent declaration under Section 3 (2) of the Ordinance forcibly. The respondents Nos. 1 to 7 being public officers must act in accordance with the provisions of law and cannot forcibly take possession of any coal

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

1973 Supreme(Cal) 109

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTAS. C. GHOSHNEW CHHATABAR COAL CO. LTD. - AppellantVersusJ. G. KUMARMANGALAM - RespondentMatter 144 Of 1973Decided On : APRIL 9, 1973

Cases Referred (1)

Judicial Analysis

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
S. C. GHOSH
NEW CHHATABAR COAL CO. LTD. - Appellant
Versus
J. G. KUMARMANGALAM - Respondent
Matter 144 Of 1973
Decided On : APRIL 9, 1973