SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Jhk) 980

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.
Brahmi Impex Limited, Kolkata (West Bengal)… … Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Others … Respondents.
W.P. (C) No. 2869 of 2008
Decided on 17/ 07/2009

Advocate Appeared
For the Petitioner:-Mr. N. K. Pasari, Advocate. For the Respondent-State:-Mr. P. K. Prasad, A.G. & J.C. to S.C. (Mines). For the Respondent-U.O.I.:-Mr. Md. Mokhtar Khan, Sr. S.C.G. For the Respondent No. 8:-Mr. Anil Sinha, Sr. Advocate.
A. Mittal, Krishna Shanker & Abhisek Sinha, Advocates.

Headnote:Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957—Section 11 r/w Rules 12/26 of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960—grant of mining lease—it is discretionary power of State Govt.--- no one can claim right or vested right for grant of mining lease for mining operations in the State—application dismissed. (Paras 20 to 24)

Judgment

Petitioner in this writ application has prayed:-

(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents and each of them to recommend the case of the petitioner for the grant of mining lease and/or take suitable decision in respect thereof on the application of the petitioner both for the 500 acres of land subsequently notified and also the preferential right of the petitioner in respect of the balance area of land, applied for in terms of Section 11 (2) of the M.M.D.R. Act, in respect of its applications.

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ commanding the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to grant mining lease to the petitioner for mining iron Ore in Karampada Reserve Forests

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ commanding the Respondent nos. 1 to 7 to treat all applicants for grant of mining lease in respect of Karampada Reserve Forests Iron Ore Mines, equally and without any discrimination.

(iv) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 not to give effect and/or further effect to the purported recommendation by the Respondent Nos. 3 to 7 in favour of the Respondent No. 8 without considering the case of the petitioner.

(v) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Prohibition restraining the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 from permitting the Respondent No. 8 to carry on any mining activities of any nature whatsoever at the Meghataburu Iron Ore Mines.

(vi) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Prohibition prohibiting the Respondents and/or their men, servants and agents from making any further recommendation and/or giving any effect and/or further, effect to recommendation already made in respect of the areas applied for by the petitioner in Karampada Reserve Forests without disposing of the application of the petitioner. A further prayer which introduced by way of amendment of the original writ application and on the basis of the purported subsequent developments, is for quashing the letter No. 5/17/2008-M.IV, dated 05.06.2008, issued by the under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Mines (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit of the Respondent nos. 3 to 7), whereby the Central Government’s approval for grant of mining lease for Iron Ore and Manganese Ore, over an area of 500 acres in the Meghahatuburu (Karampada Reserve Forests) in the State of Jharkhand, in favour of M/s. Arcelor Mittal Steel India Ltd. (Respondent No. 8).

An additional prayer has also been made for quashing the Annexure-B to the counter affidavit of the Respondent-State, which is a comparative statement of merit of the mining lease occupants.

2. The petitioner, being a public limited Company, duly registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, pursuant to its objective of setting up an integrated steel Plant and captive power plant in the State of Jharkhand, had submitted an application on 20th May, 2005 to the Government of Jharkhand for grant of mining lease in respect of an area comprising of 1468 hectares within village Karampada, Talluque-Gua, District-West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. Upon receipt of the petitioner’s application, a notice was issued to the petitioner on 05th August, 2005, calling upon him to appear at the hearing, scheduled to be held on 18th August, 2005. The petitioner appeared at the hearing and had submitted all the relevant in formations as called upon. However, no decision on the petitioner’s application, was conveyed to it.

3. In the meantime, on 09th February, 2007, a memorandum of understanding was entered into between the Government of Jharkhand and the petitioner, for setting up an integrated Steel Plant and captive power plant in the State of Jharkhand and under which, the State of Jharkhand had assured that it would make best endeavour to ensure that adequate captive mining sources are made available to the petitioner’s Company as per requirement, at least for a period of 30 years and had also a









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top