Back
ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, JAYANT BANERJI
Banketeshwar Prasad Chaturvedi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anjani Kumar Mishra, J.
Heard Shri. Dev Brat Mukherjee, for the petitioner and Shri. M. C. Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General for the State, Shri. Navin Sinha, Senior Advocate for the sixth respondent and Shri. Amit Saxena Senior Advocate, for respondent no.7.
2. The petition seeks a writ of mandamus commanding third respondent (State of U.P. through Secretary, Industrial Development, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow) to renew the prospecting license issued to the petitioner for an area of 1.45 hectares and to execute a fresh lease for an area 5.63 hectares in village Billi Markundi, Pargana Agori, Tehsil Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra, as directed by the order of the Government of India, Ministry of Mines, dated 26.07.2010.
3. The facts briefly stated are that on 22.12.1998, the petitioner filed application under Rule 9(1) of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, for a prospecting license for an area of 10 hectares in village Billi Markund, Pargana Agori, Tehsil Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra over plot No. 3688 (New No. 7985k).
4. It appears that the State Government required the petitioner to obtain a no objection certificate from the U.P. State Mineral Development Corp
The court upheld that the State's refusal to renew a prospecting license was justified due to prior leases and forest designation, affirming that leases contrary to the Mines Act are void.
The court emphasized the necessity of fair procedures and proper consideration of facts in administrative decisions regarding mining licenses.
There cannot be a collateral challenge to an order by a respondent in a writ proceeding instituted by a petitioner for implementation of such order.
Point of law: An application for the renewal for a prospecting licence shall be disposed of by the State Government before the expiry of the period of prospecting licence and if the application is no....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the entitlement to mining lease and the transfer of prospecting license must comply with the requirements of the Mineral Concession Rules, 196....
There was a specific notification issued on 10th June 2011 by the Director of Mines and Geology in exercise of the powers under Section 5 read with Section 8 of the said Act of 1957 of grant of minin....
The renewal of a mining lease must comply with procedural requirements, including consultation with the Gram Panchayat and conducting a Joint Inspection as mandated by applicable rules.
The court ruled that a recommendation by the State does not constitute a vested right or letter of intent under the MMDR Act, and the amended provisions apply prospectively.
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
