O R D E R

Per J.K. Maheshwari, CJ Invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner filed the present writ petition, seeking to quash the policy decision vide notification dated 27.07.2019 of the Department of Atomic Energy (hereinafter be referred as ‘the DAE’ for brevity), i.e., respondent No.3 as being ultra vires to the Offshore Areas Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 2002 (hereinafter be referred as ‘the OAMDR Act’ for brevity); to quash the consequential order dated 06.11.2019 issued by respondent No.1 – Ministry of Mines, Government of India; to declare Rule 3A of the Offshore Areas Mineral Concession Rules, 2006 (hereinafter be referred as ‘the OAMC Rules’ for brevity) as ultra vires to the provisions of the OAMDR Act; to quash the letter dated 01.04.2019 addressed by the Ministry of Mines, Government of India, to the Central Bureau of Investigation for reopening of the Preliminary Enquiry bearing No.PE AC1 2012 A0005, which was closed earlier vide closure report dated 28.03.2013, for further investigation; and to direct the respondents to execute and sign the deed of exploration licence in favour of the petitioner in furtherance to the order of grant dated 05.04.2011.

2. The present case has chequered history, wherein the issue of grant of exploration licences under the OAMDR Act has already undergone two rounds of litigation upto Hon’ble the Supreme Court and on both occasions, Hon’ble the Supreme Court has refused to interfere with the findings of the High Court. While dismissing S.L.P.(C).No.5530 of 2014, vide order dated 31.03.2014, against the judgment of Bombay High Court, Hon’ble the Supreme Court upheld the process of selection, legality and propriety in granting exploration licences in favour of private parties including the petitioner herein.

3. The facts which are not in dispute and are borne out from the record are, the OAMDR Act came into force on 15.01.2010. Respondent No.1 appointed the administering authority under the provisions of the OAMDR Act on 11.02.2010. The said administering authority issued notification dated 07.06.2010, in terms of the mandate of Section 10 of the OAMDR Act, which required the authority to issue notification within six (6) months of the Act, indicating the offshore areas available for grant of exploration licences. By the said notification, 62 offshore blocks were notified for grant of exploration licences. Pursuant to the said notification, various applications were received seeking allotment of the blocks. The authority concerned accordingly has constituted a screening committee consisting of experts from Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM), Geological Survey of India (GSI) and National Institute of Oceanography (NIO). The screening committee has drawn up guidelines based on the requirements under the provisions of the OAMDR Act, more specifically Section 12, and undertook the selection process recommending the names by a list of allottees for grant of exploration licences on the website on 22.03.2011. Thereafter, the administering authority, in exercise of its power under section 12 of the OAMDR Act, issued orders dated 05.04.2011 granting exploration licences for the 62 blocks to 16 successful applicants, including the petitioner herein who was granted six blocks in the Bay of Bengal. The said blocks granted to the petitioner for exploration are adjoining the coastline of Andhra Pradesh State.

4. Assailing the process of selection adopted by the administering authority, various private parties, though not participated, approached different High Courts and tried to stall the allotment. Several Writ Petitions were filed before this Court, the High Court of Madras and the High Court of Bombay by different parties. In the meantime, based on the news item published in newspapers, which sought to raise suspicion on the allocation of the blocks, the Central Bureau of Investigation initiated a preliminary enquiry. However, after conducting