The legislative intent to introduce auction as the method for distribution of state largess and the need for a purposive interpretation of statutory provisions were central to the court's decision.

Rajasekhar Mantha, J.

1. The writ petitioner challenges an order dated 20th October 2016 by which his application for renewal of Lease for mining of Blackstone was rejected by the Respondent No. 1.

2. The facts of the case are that on the 29th of May 2007 the petitioner was granted a Lease for mining Blackstone, in about 1.39 Acres of land at Mouza-Kadampur, under Barabazar Police Station, in the District of Purulia in West Bengal.

3. The said Lease was initially for 5 years with an option for renewal for a further period of 5 years. The petitioner accordingly commenced mining operations.

4. On 18th October 2011, the petitioner applied for renewal of the Lease. On the 25th of April 2013 the State asked the petitioner to obtain an Environmental Clearance (EC) from the concerned authorities. The said EC was submitted by the petitioner on the 12th of June 2015.

5. Upon failure of the State to decide the application for renewal the writ petitioner filed W.P. No. 666 (W) of 2016. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on the 9th of February 2016 directing the authorities to take a decision on the petitioner’s application for renewal.

6. Pursuant thereto the Respondent No. 1, after hearing the writ petitioner passed the impugned order rejecting the petitioner application for renewal.

7. The principal ground for rejection was that since after coming into force of the West Bengal Minor Minerals Concessions Rules 2016 and in view of Section 61 thereof, all applications for Lease, made prior to the notification of the Act would become null and void. The relevant part of the said order is set out herein below:-

“3. It appears that the Application for Renewal was made as per WB Minor Minerals Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred as WBMM Rules, 2002). Presently, the existing and future mining Lease applications are guided under WB Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016 and as per rule 61 of such rules, all mining Lease applications have been declared to be ineligible if not saved under proviso to such rules. The rule 61 is reproduced below:

“All applications for mining Lease of minor minerals including the reclassified minor minerals vide SO No. 423(E) dated 12th February, 2015 received prior to the giving effect to this rules irrespective of its duration of pendency shall become ineligible. Provided that if the applicant has been issued a Grant Order or Letter of Intent (LOI) or any other Government Order requiring the alteration of applicant’s position then his mining Lease application may be considered after due compliance of the all the necessary conditions.

4. On scrutiny of the purported memorandum referred above, I find it to be a mere memorandum asking the applicant to acquire the Environment Clearance in addition to other requisite papers as under the WBMM Rules, 2002 there was no provision for Environment Clearance. The memorandum was meant to comply with the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in IA No. 12-13 of 2011 in SLP (C) No. 19628-19629 of 2009 in matter of Deepak Kumar vs. State of Haryana wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India made the Environment Clearance mandatory for all mining Leases. The memorandum does not constitute a Grant Order or Letter of Intent (LOI) or a Government Order as approved by the appropriate authority.

5. The prevailing rules of 2016 does not allow the grant of renewal of mining Lease of minor minerals and the relevant provisions of the Mining Lease Deed as executed by and between the applicant and the Government of West Bengal shall be deemed to be amended in view of the new rules so, the applicant has lost the right of renewal of mining Lease.

6. Above all, the recent judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in WP (Civil) No. 423/2010 and WP (Civil) No. 10/2011 (commonly known as 2G Judgment), in the Presidential Reference Case dated 12.04.2012 and WP (Crl.) No. 120/2012 in the matter of Manohar Lal Sharma vs. The Principal Secretary and Othe