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

2015 Supreme(Mad) 3349

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
M.R. Govindan & Anr. - Petitioner
Vs.
The District Collector, Kancheepuram - Respondent
WP.Nos.19477 and 23928 of 2015, MP.Nos.1 and 1 of 2015
Decided on : 10.12.2015

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. K. Ramakrishna Reddy
For the Respondent: Mr. T.N. Rajagopalan

The central legal point established in the judgment is the ownership of mineral rights and the mandatory requirements for granting stone quarry lease under Rule 41 and Rule 42.

Headnote:

quarry lease - mineral rights - Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 - Rule 8C, Rule 41, Rule 42 - The court discussed the application of Rule 8C to lands where mineral rights vest with the pattadars, the mandatory requirements for granting stone quarry lease under Rule 41 and Rule 42, and the need for approved mining plan and environment clearance. The court also referred to various decisions of the Madras High Court and the Supreme Court to support its findings.

Fact of the Case:

The Petitioners sought a direction to prohibit the Respondent from infringing their right to quarry from their patta lands after the expiry of the lease period, citing the ownership of mineral rights and the application of relevant rules.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the mineral and subsoil rights vest with the pattadars, but emphasized the mandatory requirements for granting stone quarry lease under Rule 41 and Rule 42, including approved mining plan and environment clearance.

Issues: Ownership of mineral rights, application of Rule 8C, mandatory requirements for granting stone quarry lease, renewal or extension of quarry lease.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the mineral and subsoil rights vest with the pattadars, but emphasized the mandatory requirements for granting stone quarry lease under Rule 41 and Rule 42, including approved mining plan and environment clearance.

Final Decision: The court directed the disposal of the pending renewal application and instructed the Petitioner to file necessary applications for granting stone quarry lease, to be disposed of on merits and in accordance with the law.

ORDER :

In these Writ Petitions, the Petitioners seeks for a direction, prohibiting the Respondent from infringing the right of the Petitioners to quarry from their patta lands, after expiry of the lease period, on payment of necessary seigniorage fee subject to the result of the issue as to whether the pattadar is liable to pay seigniorage fee or not, since the said issue was referred to the larger Bench of the Honourable Supreme Court.

2. The case of the Petitioners is as follows:-

a. The Petitioners were granted quarry lease, by the proceedings dated 08.07.2010 and 19.03.2010, in respect of their respective petition mentioned lands, for a period of five years from 08.07.2010 to 07.07.2015 and from 19.03.2010 to 18.03.2015, respectively, under the Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. The Tamil Nadu State Government, by letter No.Ms.628, dated 10.05.1982, informed all the District Collectors that the pattadars are not the owners of the minerals in their respective patta lands and the Government is the owner of the minerals and also issued GO.Ms.No.130, Industries (K) Department, dated 8.2.1986, amending Section III and Appendix IV and V of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, but however, the said amendment was not given effect to. Subsequently, by GO.Ms.No.1273, Industries (H-1) Department, dated 9.12.1988, all the rules in Section III have been amended and by GO.Ms.No.608, Industries (MMC-2), Department dated 2.9.1989, further amendments were carried out, in respect of granting of granite quarrying lease in the Government lands. By the said G.O.Ms.No.1273, dated 09.12.1988 and G.O.Ms.No.608 dated 02.09.1989, the 1st respondent sought to give effect to the said G.O.Ms.No.130, dated 08.02.1986, by which headings of Section-III, Appendixes IV & V were amended.

b. The writ petitions filed as against the said G.O.Ms.No.1273, dated 09.12.1988 and G.O.Ms.No.608, Industries (MMC-2) Department, dated 02.09.1989, were dismissed and the writ appeals filed as against the same were also dismissed, holding that the subsoil rights in Patta lands vest with the government. As no SLPs were filed, the said judgement became final. Rule 8C was introduced by G.O.Ms.No.1312, Industries dated 02.12.1977, by which granting of leases for quarrying black granite in favour of private persons was banned. In AIR 1981 SC 711 (2J) (State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Hind Stones Etc. etc.,) the Honourable Supreme Court, while upholding the validity of the said Rule 8C, has clarified that in so far as the government lands, where the Government is the owner of the mineral, as per Section II of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, the said Rule 8C will apply and in so far as the lands where the mineral rights vest with the pattadars as per Section III of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, the said Rule 8C will not apply.

c. The language of Rule 8C is clear that it cannot have any application to the lands, in which the right to minerals belongs to the pattadars. Rule 8C is only concerned with leases for quarrying black granite and it cannot, therefore, have any application to cases where no lease is sought from the Government. In the case of lands, in which the right to minerals belongs to private owners and those owners seek permission to quarry black granite, the applications will have to be dealt with under the relevant rules in Section III of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Rule 8C, it may be noted, does not impose a general ban on quarrying black granite, but only imposes a bar on the grant of leases of quarrying black granite.

d. By letter dated 06.06.2015, the petitioner in WP.No.19477 of 2015 informed the respondent about his intention to continue quarry operation of stone and earth from the subject patta lands, after expiry of the present lease period i.e., after 07.07.2015 and he was informed that they are waiting for necessary instructions from the government. The said action of the re













































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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