Leases for minor minerals cannot be converted to major minerals without following specific statutory procedures; fresh applications are required under amended rules.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

1. Petitioner herein, who was granted mining lease for limestone, as a ‘minor mineral’ under provision of Himachal Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) and Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 1960, framed under Section 15 of Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter ‘MMDR Act’), is aggrieved of communication dated 20.7.2016 (Annexure P-5) issued by the Ministry of Mines, Government of India, thereby rejecting the proposal of Government of Himachal Pradesh for conversion of mining lease granted for extraction of limestone under minor minerals to major minerals. Petitioner, who is a private land owner, was earlier doing mining of limestone as a minor mineral pursuant to permission granted by the State of Himachal Pradesh under rules referred herein above. During subsistence of afore mining lease granted in favour of the petitioner, it came to be transpired that limestone extracted from mines is not only of limekiln grade, but also of industrial usage like cement, chemical industries and glass factories etc. and the percentage of CaCO is more than limestone. In view of above, 3 limestone came to be shifted from the category of ‘minor’ to ‘major’ mineral.

2. Since permission for mining of major minerals could only be granted by the Government of India, State of Himachal Pradesh, which otherwise on the basis of opinion rendered by the Deputy Controller of Mines-cum-Officer-In-charge, Indian Bureau of Mines, Dehradun, Uttrakhand, had proceeded to issue Letter of Intent in favour of the applicant/lease holder/petitioner herein, to get the mining plan approved from the Indian Bureau of Mines, sent a detailed communication dated 29.8.2015 (Annexure P-4), for conversion of lease granted in favour of the petitioner from ‘minor mineral’ to ‘major mineral’ however vide communication dated 20.7.2016 aforesaid proposal came to be rejected by the Government of India on the following grounds:

“5. The matter has been examined and the Ministry is of the opinion that:

(a) The letter dated 23.09.2014 issue by the Dy COM, IBM, Dehradun based on which the LOIs were issued by the State Government is basically an internal communication from the field office of IBM at Dehradun to the CCOM's office in the Head Office of IBM at Nagpur. Only a copy of the letter has been endorsed for information of the State Goverment. The letter addressed to CCOM, IBM, Nagpur cannot be treated as advice. It is needless to say that in statutory matters involving the exercise of powers of the Central Government, it is the Ministry of Mines which exercises such powers with the approval of the Hon'ble Minister of Mines.

(b) Section 31 of the Act provides for relaxation of rules made under section 13. As such, the leases granted for minor minerals cannot be converted into major minerals by exercise of powers under section 31. Further, the provisions of section 8A do not apply to concessions granted for minor minerals.

6. The letters of intent granted by State Government in this regard are in violation of the provisions of the MMDR Act and the rules made there under and, therefore, need to be canceled forthwith. The State Government is hereby advised that the said leases be cancelled and action be taken for grant of fresh concessions as per the provisions of the Minerals (Evidence of Mineral Contents) Rules, 2015, the Mineral (Auction) Rules, 2015 and the Minerals (Other than Atomic and Hydro Carbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016, made under section 13.

7. This issues with the approval of the Hon'ble Minister of State (I/C) for Mines.

3. In the afore background, petitioner has approached this Court,