JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matters in Court.

2. Today the matter comes up on application preferred by the petitioner for disposal of the writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for grant of mining lease for Open Cast Iron Ore Mining near Village Dipas, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar in State of Rajasthan, as per the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was granted Letter of Intent by the State Government on 05.12.2014 for grant of mining lease for Open Cast Iron Ore Mining for the area in question vide Annex. 8.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the relevant portion of the handbook for Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 read with Forest Conservation Rules, 2003 (Guidelines & Clarification). The relevant portion being Clause 7.3 sub-clause (i) of the said rules reads as under:-

"(i) In case of mining projects, having forest land in part or in full, approval of Central Government under Section 2(iii) of the FC Act, for the entire forest land located within a mining lease shall be obtained before execution of a mining lease in accordance with the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the rules framed there under. Mining in the forest land within the ML area, including government can be done only after diversion of the forest area under Section 2(ii) of the FC Act, 1980."

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further drawn attention of this Court towards the letter dated 06.01.2017 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (FC Division) written to the Principal Secretary (Forests), Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, in which, the following conditions are relevant:-

"(viii) This approval does not, in any manner, exempt a user agency from obtaining prior approval under Section 2(ii) of the FC Act in regard to such area of forest land, which is to be used for non-forest purpose.

(xii) The grant of permission under Section 2(iii) of Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 will not confer any right on the project proponent for diversion under Section 2(ii) of Forest (Conversation) Act, 1980."

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on a conjoint reading of the handbook and the letter of the Ministry of Environment, Government of India indicates that the procedure of Section 2 Sub-section (iii) of the of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has to precede to the procedure in Section 2 Sub-section (ii).

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that any forest land or any portion thereof which may be assigned by way of lease or otherwise to any private person or to any other authority, corporation, agency or any other organization shall be restricted and shall be amenable to the approval of the Central Government.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Section 2 of the Forest Act of 1980 itself envisages that for exclusion from restriction the authority would lie with Central Government only.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the iron ore being a major mineral the approval is in the sole domain of the Union of India and the Forest Act restrictions relaxation are also within the sole domain of Union of India with certain procedural factors running through the State Government.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even after the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 1957, the petitioner's case remain alive as the Petitioner's Lol was prior to the cut-off date of 11.01.2017.

12. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court in the presence of the petitioner and in the presence of learned Assistant Solicitor General as well as learned Additional Advocate General had passed a co