Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
K. C. Agrawal and K. M. Dayal, JJ.
SHEO VARAN SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAT PRADESH - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ 1980 Of 1978
Decided On : 08/10/1979
MINES AND MINERALS - LEASE - TERMS AND CONDITIONS - SETTLEMENT BY MINES TRIBUNAL - APPLICABILITY OF CENTRAL ACT AND RULES - DEAD RENT - FIXATION - MAXIMUM RATE - JUSTIFICATION - PERIOD OF LEASE - DETERMINATION - RELEVANCE OF RULES - STATUTORY TENANCY - RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a former zamindar, was granted a statutory lease for mining operations under Section 107(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951. The terms and conditions of the lease were disputed, leading to an application by the Collector before the Mines Tribunal for their settlement. The Tribunal determined the terms in accordance with the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963, framed under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (Central Act). The petitioner challenged the Tribunal's decision, arguing that the Central Act and Rules were not applicable to statutory leases and that the dead rent fixed was excessive.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Central Act and Rules were applicable to the settlement of terms and conditions for statutory leases under Section 107(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951. The Court reasoned that the Proviso to Section 107(2), which required the terms to be settled in accordance with the Central Act, referred to the law as it existed at the time of settlement, including subsequent amendments and new enactments. The Court also found that the fixation of the maximum rate of dead rent by the Tribunal was justified based on the nature of the minerals extracted and the petitioner's failure to provide accounts or respond to interrogatories.
Issues: 1. Whether the Central Act and Rules were applicable to the settlement of terms and conditions for statutory leases under Section 107(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951? 2. Whether the fixation of the maximum rate of dead rent by the Tribunal was justified?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court interpreted the Proviso to Section 107(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951, which required the terms and conditions of statutory leases to be settled in accordance with the Central Act, as referring to the law as it existed at the time of settlement, including subsequent amendments and new enactments. The Court reasoned that this interpretation was necessary to give effect to the legislative intent of ensuring that the terms and conditions were settled in accordance with the most up-to-date and relevant law. 2. The Court found that the Tribunal's fixation of the maximum rate of dead rent was justified based on the nature of the minerals extracted and the petitioner's failure to provide accounts or respond to interrogatories. The Court held that the petitioner could not be heard complaining about the amount of dead rent when he had knowingly operated the mines since 1951 and enjoyed the fruits thereof.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition, upholding the decision of the Mines Tribunal and the applicability of the Central Act and Rules to the settlement of terms and conditions for statutory leases under Section 107(2) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951.
( 1 ) THIS writ petition is directed against an order of the Mines Tribunal, Agra, dated 24-11-1977, determining the terms and conditions of the lease under Section 107 (2) of U. P. Zamindari abolition and Land Reforms Act (Act No. 1 of 1951), (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).
( 2 ) THE relevant facts are these. The petitioner, Sheobaran Singh, was an intermediary and zamindar of Villages Ghaskata and Tantpur in tehsil Kheragarh, district Agra, before the enforcement of U. P. Act I of 1951. On the publication of the notification under Section 4 of the act, all the estates stood transferred to and vested in the State free from all encumbrances. Consequences of vesting of an estate in the State are stated in Section 6 of the Act. It provides that when the notification under Section 4 has been published in the Gazette, then,
" (a) all rights, title and interest of all the intermediaries.- (i) in every estate in such area including land. . . . . . . . . . . . , and (ii) in all sub-soil in such estates including rights, if any, in mines and minerals, whether being worked or not, shall cease and be vested in the State of Uttar Pradesh free from all encumbrances. "
( 3 ) AFTER the enforcement of U. P. Act I of 1951, the petitioner was asked by the Collector, Agra, to stop quarrying stones in the said village. The petitioners, thereupon, filed a writ petition in the high Court. The writ petition was finally allowed on March 18, 1955. The High Court held that the petitioner was entitled to take advantage of the provisions of Chapter VI of the Act. A direction was issued by the High Court to the State Govt. and the Collector, Agra, for considering the application of the petitioner for grant of a lease under Sections 106 to 108 of the act. It was also held that the petitioner was entitled to continue the working of the mines in accordance with the provisions of Chap. VI of the Act.
( 4 ) IN pursuance of the judgment of the High Court, the Collector, Agra sent a letter dated 8-1-1964, offering the terms and conditions of the proposed lease, to the petitioner. Along with this letter, a draft of the mining lease containing the detailed terms and conditions had also been sent. This had offered to give a lease to the petitioner for a period of fifteen years and its terms and conditions were proposed to be in accordance with U. P. Minor Minerals (Concession)Rules, 1963, (hereinafter referred to as Rules), framed under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (Act No. 67 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act ).
( 5 ) THE petitioner filed an objection dated 17-2-1964 to the Collector against the terms contained in the proposed lease. He also filed a writ petition in this Court challenging the validity of the terms and conditions contained in the draft lease. The writ petition was dismissed on 9-2-1965. The High Court, however, held that if the petitioner and the State Government were not able to agree mutually with the terms and conditions on which the lease had to be given to the petitioner, the terms of the lease would be settled by the Mines Tribunal to be appointed under Section 110 of the Act. As the terms could not be settled, the Collector, Agra, on 12-10-1966 filed an application under Section 107 (2) of the Act for settlement of the terms.
( 6 ) THE application was contested by the petitioner on various grounds, including that since the provisions of the Central Act did not apply and the Rules framed by the U. P. Government under the said Act were also not applicable, the terms and conditions could not be settled in accordance with them. The points of disagreements were as follows: (See points of disagreement on next page)
( 7 ) ON the pleadings, the following issues were framed:
1. Whether the lease is in perpetuity by operation of law ? If not, what period should be fixed for the lease? 2. Whether the terms of the lease can be retrospective also? 3. What area of land is, or dead r
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
