Back
2025 Supreme(Jhk) 1588
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, JJ.
Sadanand Mehta son of Late Lakhan Lal – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand represented through Secretary, Department – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 5178 of 2025
Decided on : 19-09-2025
For the Appellant :Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate Ms. Mamta Kumari, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General
Renewal of mining leases is not permissible post statutory deadlines, and failure to provide timely applications nullifies claims for extension.
Headnote:(A) Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 - Rules 9(च) and 23 - Writ of Certiorari sought against the Order of Deputy Commissioner rejecting renewal of mining lease for not adhering to submission timelines. Delay attributed to statutory restrictions where applications must be submitted before 31.03.2022, failing which renewal is impossible. (Paras 11, 22, 24)
(B) Statutory Duty - Authorities must maintain a register of applications as per Rule 17, and failure to do so cannot exonerate the petitioner from timely filing responsibilities. (Paras 18, 19)
(C) Principle of Harmonious Construction of Statutory Provisions - Renewal of lease beyond statutory deadline violates legal mandates. (Paras 24, 26)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed for renewal of a mining lease before expiration but faced rejection due to alleged late submission as the application was submitted post the statutory period. The petitioner contended timely payment and statutory deemed extension, which was not acknowledged by the respondent authorities.
Findings of Court:
The application was deemed undated and too late, contradicting the statutory provision restricting renewal after 31.03.2022. The court upheld that the petitioner's claim lacked evidentiary support for timely submission.
Issues: Can a mining lease be renewed post statutory expiry date? Whether the failure of the authority to maintain registers absolves the petitioner of their responsibility?
Ratio Decidendi: The court found non-compliance with statutory provisions critical, emphasizing no renewal beyond the prescribed deadline. The application’s undated nature further weakened the claim, confirming that compliance is essential for relief.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of mining lease renewal (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on statutory obligations and timelines (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. legal restrictions on lease renewal post deadline (Para 11 , 25) |
| 4. court's analysis on application submission and statutory limits (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. dismissal of writ petition (Para 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking therein the following reliefs:
“(A) For issuance of appropriate Writ(s)/Order(s) /Direction(s), particularly a writ of Certiorari for quashing/setting aside theundated orderof the Court of Mines Commissioner, Jharkhand passed in Revision Case No. 29/2024 (Annexure-4) under Rule 63 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 communicated through Memo No. 1223/MC dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure-5) of the Respondent Deputy Director (Hq.), Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby and whereunderthe Revision preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 17.10.2024 of Deputy Commissioner, Koderma communicated vide Memo No. 1721/M dated 18.10.2024 (Annexure-3) of District Mining Officer, Koderma has been disallowed.
(B) Further for issuance of an appropriate Writ(s)/Order (s) / Direction(s), particularly a writ of Certiorari for quashing the the order dated 17.10.2024 of Deputy Commissioner, Koderma communicated vide Memo No. 1721/M dated 18.10.2024 (Annexure-3) of District Mining Officer, Koderma whereby and whereunder the renewal application dated 01.11.2022 of mining lease of the petitioner has been rejected.
(C) Further for issuance of appropriate writs/orders/directions showing cause to the Respondents as how and under what circumstances, the application for renewal of mining lease alongwith the challan of renewal application fee dated 01.11.2022 has been treated to have been submitted on 22.11.2022 and to produce before this Hon'ble Court the statutory application register maintained by the Respondents under Rule 17 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 to ascertain the date of application and challan.
(D) Upon quashing of aforesaid Memo dated 18.10.2024 and order dated 19.05.2025, for issuance of appropriate writ/s, order/s or direction/s particularly in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon Respondent No.2 to consider the renewal application dated 01.11.2022 under Rule 23 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 by reasoned and speaking order.
(E) Further for issuance of an appropriate writ/s, order/s or direction/s for restraining the Respondents from dispossessing the Petitioner from the Mining Lease hold area and further restraining the respondents from creating any third part right during the pendency of this Writ petition.
(F) To pass such order/order(s) direction/direction(s) as your lordship may deem fit and proper for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner”
2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, needs to referred herein, which are as under:
The petitioners held a mining lease of stone minor mineral in raiyati land situated in Mauza Paharpur Plot Nos. 511, 512(P), 513(P), 514, 515, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 545, 546, 547(P), 548, 549, 550 & 552 P.S.-Nawalsahi District Koderma, for an Area of 2.4725 Acres, which has been duly executed by Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj on 14.10.2014 and registered by the District Sub Registrar Koderma on 31.10.2014. The lease hold had been for a period of 10 years from 04.02.2013 to 03.02.2023.
Before expiry of the term of the aforesaid lease, the petitioner/applicant applied for renewal of mining lease on 01.11.2022 under rule 23 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 in the office of District Mining Officer, Koderma.
It has been stated that in terms of the Rule 17 of the JMMC Rules, the respondents are legally obligated to maintain a register with respect to the ap
