Back
2014 Supreme(Chh) 306
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.
Mahamaya Minerals – Appellants
Vs.
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 59 of 2013
Decided On : 9.7.2014
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Awadh Tripathi and S.C. Verma.
For Respondents/Defendant:Arun Sao, Dy. Advocate General.
Headnote:
Mines and Minerals Act, 1957 - Section 23 - Challenge In Aforesaid Writ Petitions - Cancelling license - Check illegal mining and theft of coal - While aforesaid petitioners were operating their license and running their coal storage in the licensed premises, the Directorate of Geology and Mining, Chhattisgarh issued direction to Collectors of districts in response to clarification sought from Collector - In Directorate of Mining issued directions Collector, District in response to Collectors - A perusal of letter shows that the direction were issued to clarify certain aspects which included a clarification sought for the purposes of reckoning distance of limit beyond which coal storage could be permitted clarification stated that the prohibited distance of has to be measured as aerial radial/shortest distance - Therefore, it is the aerial distance which should be taken into consideration while granting permission to establish coal storage depot by the licensees. This direction of the Director, Geology and Mining of the State of C.G. was issued to Collectors of the districts within whose jurisdiction coal storage depot of petitioners is situated. Pursuant to this direction of the Directorate licensing authority issued notices to each of the petitioners to show cause as to why license of coal storage depot granted to the petitioners under the Rules be not cancelled – Held, At the same time, it has to be held that for establishment of coal depot within the prohibited area competent authorities are no less responsible licensing authority ought to have taken due care and caution before grant of license to the petitioners by ensuring that it is the aerial distance and not the road distance which is required to be measured to find out whether the plot is within prohibited area - As has been observed above even licensing authority in the beginning, was of the opinion that it is the road distance which has to be taken into consideration and on that basis, enquiry under Rule 9 of the Rules of 2009 was made while considering applications for grant of license - Undisputedly, if distance is measured by road, all the depots are situated beyond mining area – Therefore petitioners/licensees cannot be faulted nor they can be blamed petitioners never suppressed any material facts and it was mainly for the licensing authority to apply the Rule in its true spirit before granting license to each of the petitioners. The petitioners, having applied and obtained license, proceeded to establish their coal depot, for which, they have been granted license for certain period. In all cases, the only operative reason for cancellation of license is that the depot is situated within aerial distance. Except this, there is no other allegation of theft or illegal mining against the petitioners in all the writ petitions - Taking into consideration all the above aspects of the matter, prohibitory conditions contained in Rules of and taking into consideration that the licenses came to be issued to each of petitioners in violation of provisions contained in Rules of 2009, though the action of cancellation of license in each of the cases is upheld, in factual scenario of case it would be just and reasonable to grant breathing time to each of the petitioners to shift their storage depot to some other place which is outside the prohibited area of aerial distance from the mining area – petition Disposed off
1. This order shall govern disposal of aforesaid writ petitions, as in all the writ petitions, common issue arises for consideration based on similar fact. The petitioners in all these writ petitions have been granted license/permit for storage of coal under the provisions of C.G. Minerals (Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2009 (for short the Rules of 2009). Each of the petitioners, desirous of opening, establishing and running coal storage depot to facilitate transportation of coal after mining and removal from mining area, applied to the competent authority of the mining department for grant of license for coal storage. The application of each of the petitioners in aforesaid cases was considered and the Mining Officer in the office of the Collector granted license in prescribed Form 7, referable to Rule 6(1) of the Rules of 2009. For ready reference, the details of the date of issuance of storage licenses and the period of such license in respect of each of the petitioners is indicated below:-
While aforesaid petitioners were operating their license and running their coal storage in the licensed premises, the Directorate of Geology and Mining, Chhattisgarh issued direction to the Collectors of districts in response to clarification sought from the Collector. In W.P. (C) No. 61 of 2013, the Directorate of Mining issued directions on 24-9-2012 to the Collector, District Janjgir Champa in response to Collector's D.O. letter dated 1-6-2013. A perusal of letter dated 24-9-2012 (Annexure P/2) shows that the direction were issued to clarify certain aspects which included a clarification sought for the purposes of reckoning distance of 25 kms. as limit beyond which coal storage could be permitted. The clarification stated that the prohibited distance of 25 kms. has to be measured as aerial radial/shortest distance. Therefore, it is the aerial distance which should be taken into consideration while granting permission to establish coal storage depot by the licensees. This direction of the Director, Geology and Mining of the State of C.G. was issued to the Collectors of the districts within whose jurisdiction, the coal storage depot of the petitioners is situated. Pursuant to this clarificatory direction of the Directorate, the licensing authority issued notices to each of the petitioners to show cause as to why license of coal storage depot granted to the petitioners under the Rules of 2009 be not cancelled. Though each of the petitioners submitted reply stating that as the transportation of coal is done only through road and not aerially, while measuring distance of 25 kms. it is the distance through road and not aerial distance, which should be taken into consideration. The petitioners in the respective petitions submitted through their reply that license was granted to them by the competent authority after due satisfaction and inspection of the indicated land which it is situated outside the prohibited area of 25 kms. from the coal mines. But the Collector in all the cases, acting under the directions of the Directorate of Mining, held that Rules of 2009 prohibit establishment of coal storage depot within 25 kms. of coal mines and that distance is to be measured aerially and not the road distance. As in all the cases, though road distance was more than 25 kms. but the aerial distance of the coal storage depot from coal mines was found to be less then 25 kms. the impugned orders have been passed in all the cases, cancelling license of all coal storage at the location indicated in the license. It is this action of the respondents, which is under challenge in the aforesaid writ petitions.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners in all the writ petitions raised common submission that the action of the respondents, cancelling license, is illegal, arbitrary and to serious prejudice of the petitioners who were granted license for coal storage without any suppression of fact. It is contended that while applying for grant of lic
