The Court held that the First Amendment Rules, 2019 are valid and intra vires. The Court found that the Rules, 2018 were framed by the State Government under Section 23-C of the Act, 1957, which empowers the State Government to make rules for preventing illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals. The Court also found that the Rules, 2018 are not retrospective in operation, as they came into force from the date of notification viz. 20th December, 2018 and not prior to the said date. The Court further held that the petitioners, who are holders of licenses for storage of minerals under the Rules, 2002, do not have a vested right to continue their licenses in spite of the fact that the Rules, 2002 have been rescinded. The Court also found that the grant of only 11 days' time to the stone crushers and three months' time for other license holders is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:
The Court held that the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) (First Amendment) Rules, 2019 (First Amendment Rules, 2019) are valid and intra vires. However, the Court read down Rule 17(c) of the Rules, 2018, which provided three months' time from 20th December, 2018 to dispose of the entire material, and extended the period till 30th June, 2019. The Court also set aside any coercive action including seizure taken against the petitioners under the Rules, 2018 after expiry of the period mentioned in Rule 17 (c).
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who are holders of licenses for storage of minerals under the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2002 (Rules, 2002), challenged the vires of the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) (First Amendment) Rules, 2019 (First Amendment Rules, 2019). The First Amendment Rules, 2019 inserted Chapter-6, which provides for repeal and saving, consisting Rule 17, in the Rules, 2018. Rule 17(c) provided that the licenses issued under the Rules, 2002 shall be valid for a period of 03 months from the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2018.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the First Amendment Rules, 2019 are valid and intra vires. The Court found that the Rules, 2018 were framed by the State Government under Section 23-C of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (Act, 1957), which empowers the State Government to make rules for preventing illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals. The Court also found that the Rules, 2018 are not retrospective in operation, as they came into force from the date of notification viz. 20th December, 2018 and not prior to the said date.
Issues: Whether the First Amendment Rules, 2019 are valid and intra vires.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the First Amendment Rules, 2019 are valid and intra vires. The Court found that the Rules, 2018 were framed by the State Government under Section 23-C of the Act, 1957, which empowers the State Government to make rules for preventing illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals. The Court also found that the Rules, 2018 are not retrospective in operation, as they came into force from the date of notification viz. 20th December, 2018 and not prior to the said date. The Court further held that the petitioners, who are holders of licenses for storage of minerals under the Rules, 2002, do not have a vested right to continue their licenses in spite of the fact that the Rules, 2002 have been rescinded. The Court also found that the grant of only 11 days' time to the stone crushers and three months' time for other license holders is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision: The Court held that the First Amendment Rules, 2019 are valid and intra vires. However, the Court read down Rule 17(c) of the Rules, 2018, which provided three months' time from 20th December, 2018 to dispose of the entire material, and extended the period till 30th June, 2019. The Court also set aside any coercive action including seizure taken against the petitioners under the Rules, 2018 after expiry of the period mentioned in Rule 17 (c).

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, J.

1. The petitioners in this batch of writ petitions have challenged vires of the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) (First Amendment) Rules, 2019[First Amendment Rules, 2019].

2. All these writ petitions arise from a similar set of facts and raise identical question of law, hence they are collectively being disposed of by this common judgment. We are adverting to the facts of Writ-C No. 14286 of 2019, M/s. Sunrise Stone Crusher Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of U.P. and others, and it is treated as lead petition.

3. The relevant facts, as stated in the lead petition, are these: the petitioner is a private limited company. It has initiated these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India through its Director. It is engaged in the stone crushing business. The petitioner made an application for licence for storage of minerals. The District Officer, after making necessary enquiry, issued a licence to the petitioner on 06th December, 2014 in Form-B under the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2002[Rules, 2002]. The said licence was effective from 06th December, 2014 to 05th December, 2024 (for a period of ten years) for storage of minor minerals, which include river bed minerals (RBM), sand, bajri and boulders and the storage capacity of the petitioner was 2,00,000 cubic meter at a time. The land to be used for storage purpose was over Gata No. 18/2, area 2.2250 hectare and Gata No. 18/3, area 2.428 hectare, total area 4.753 hectare, in Village Shikarpur, Tehsil Swar, District Rampur.

4. Pursuant to issuance of the said licence in the year 2014, the petitioner was carrying on its business in terms of the Rules, 2002 and the conditions mentioned in its licence.

5. On 20th December, 2018 the State Government rescinded the Rules, 2002 and made new set of rules known as the Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2018[Rules, 2018], which was followed by two Government Orders dated 31st December, 2018 and 25th January, 2019. A large number of writ petitions, led by Writ- C No. 1657 of 2019, Uday Pal Singh v. State of U.P. and others, were filed by the licensees under the Rules, 2002 challenging Clause-2(1) of the Government Order dated 31st December, 2018 and 25th January, 2019. While the judgment was reserved in the said case, on 09th March, 2019 the State Government made the First Amendment Rules, 2019, thereby inserting Chapter-6, which provides Repeal and Saving, consisting Rule 17, in the Rules, 2018.

6. The Rules, 2018 was followed by a Government Order dated 31st December, 2018, wherein it was provided that the existing licence holders under the Rules, 2002 shall be given one month's time to dispose of their stored mineral materials and in case the licensee fails to dispose of its stored minerals, it shall be treated as the property of the State and it shall be disposed of in accordance with the orders issued by the State Government. The Government Order dated 31st December, 2018 also lays down the detailed procedure for its application and one of the conditions of the licence is that 90% stock of the stored minerals (sand, bajri, morum) must be disposed of on or before 30th June of the year and after disposal a declaration shall be made to the District Magistrate in the first week of October of the same year. It is also provided therein that the Rules, 2018 shall not be applicable to the stone crushers.

7. The Government Order dated 31st December, 2018 was amended on 25th January, 2019, whereby it was provided that one month's time granted to the licence holders vide Government Order dated 31st December, 2018 is extended till 28th February, 2019.

8. It is stated that the Court was informed about the subsequent amendment in 2019, hence t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

2019 Supreme(All) 2437

Cases Referred (27)

Judicial Analysis