The judgment established the principle that granting substantial mining rights without transparency and at significantly lower royalty rates compared to prevailing market rates is unjust and violates the constitutional ethos and values.

JUDGMENT :

Vipin Sanghi, J.

The petitioner has preferred the present writ-petition to challenge the vires of the notification no.1824/VII-A-1/2021/80-Kha/16 dated 28.10.2021 issued by the Uttarakhand Shasan, Industrial Development (Mining), Section-1, as being violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution.

2. The petitioner also seeks direction to the respondents to allot mining leases by competitive E-Tender cum E-auction process in terms of the Policy Notification dated 31.10.2017 affirmed by the judgment of this Court dated 19.09.2018 in WP(PIL) No.147 of 2018.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is engaged in the business of operating mining leases for minor minerals granted by the State Government.

4. The petitioner participated in e-auction conducted by the respondent-State vide e-auction notice dated 10.01.2018 for grant of mining rights in respect of the minor minerals i.e. river bed material consisting of sand, gravel, boulder, clay and muck etc. Under the tender the maximum quantity of RBM which could be mined on an annual basis by the lessee was fixed 1,32,000/- tons per year. The minimum amount which could be mined was stipulated as 66,000/- tons per year.

5. The petitioner emerged as the highest bidder in respect of the said e-tender no.001_Nainital_Bhaursha_Nainital_6.00ha/ Hkw0[kfu0bZ0@ bZ0 fufo0 lgbZ0 uhyk0@2017&18 fnukad 10-01-2018 related to Bhaursha village, Nainital, which is as follows:-

^^1- {ks= dk fooj.k

The petitioner was, accordingly, granted the mining lease on 02.12.2020.

6. The royalty payable by the petitioner was fixed as follows:-

7. The royalty was revisable upwardly 10% each year on the royalty paid for the previous year. For the first two years i.e. 2018-19 and 2019-20, the petitioner was not required to pay the royalty as the petitioner could not carry on the mining activity. No royalty was payable by the petitioner for the period from 15.05.2018 to 14.05.2019 and 15.05.2019 to 14.05.2020 since the environmental clearance was not granted till then. However, the petitioner became liable to pay the royalty from 15.05.2020 onwards, which, for the third year, was Rs.6,07,53,495/-.

8. If the said amount of royalty is divided by the maximum quantity of the RBM, which the petitioner could mine it was fixed at 1,32,000 ton, the same translates to around Rs.460.25 per ton.

9. The respondent-State issued the impugned notification dated 28.10.2021, thereby seeking to amend the Uttarakhand Minor-Minerals (Concession) Rules 2001 vide the Uttarakhand Minor-Minerals (Concession)(Amendment) Rules, 2021. The relevant amendment with which we are concerned, was carried out in Rule 3. The relevant extracts of the amendment carried out in Rule 3 by the impugned notification reads as follows:-