The court clarified that rights under a mining lease are contractual and not necessarily protected under constitutional articles; any disputes must be addressed in civil proceedings.

1.This is an application under Art.226 and Art.227 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a command to the State Government, the Collector of Surguja, the Divisional Forest Officer, Surguja, and South Eastern Railway Administration and its Engineer - in - chief at Manindragarh to secure and preserve the rights of the petitioners granted to them under a mining lease by the State of Madhya Pradesh and to ensure the continued enjoyment of those rights by the petitioners and their quiet possession. The petitioners also pray for the issue of a prohibitory direction restraining the respondents from interfering in any way with the petitioners' rights under the lease.

2. The material facts of the case are very simple. By an indenture of lease concluded between the first petitioner, the United Collieries Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the Company), and the State Government on 9th April 1962 the Company was granted for a period of thirty years, commencing from 3rd January 1946, a coal mining lease in respect of lands described in Part I of the Schedule to the indenture, known as the North Chirimiri Colliery in the district of Surguja,
"together with liberties, powers and privileges to be exercised or enjoyed"
mentioned in Part II of the Schedule, subject to the restrictions and conditions as to the exercise and enjoyment of such liberties, powers and privileges specified in Part III of the Schedule and subject to the liberties, powers and privileges mentioned in Part IV of the Schedule reserved to the State Government. The other petitioner is the Managing Agent of the Company. The petitioners claim that under the lease they are the absolute assignees of the rights of the State Government, have a restricted right to enter upon the reserved forest with the previous sanction in writing of the Divisional Forest Officer and to fell, cut and use timber trees in accordance with the terms of the lease and the conditions which the Government may impose and own surface rights also, and that they are entitled to the active protection of the lessor, the State Government, and its officers in the enjoyment of the rights, liberties and privileges granted to them under the lease.
The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents Nos. 1 and 2, namely, the Engineer - in - chief of the South Eastern Railway and the South Eastern Railway Administration, without obtaining any authority from the Government have begun constructing a railway track on a portico of the leased area; that in carrying out this project they have illegally cut down a substantial portion of the reserved forest on their area of lease and have also opened some portions of the earth exposing some fifty tons of coal which has been removed by the Railway Administration, their contractors and labourers; that the railway line when completed will make the functioning of the petitioners' aerial ropeways impossible; that the petitioners have already driven galleries underground; that they are entitled to the right of support of the surface and the laying of the railway line on it has endangered safety in the working of the mines; and that by this act of the railway authorities their rights under the lease of excavating the mineral without let or hindrance from any outside authority has been seriously hampered. The petitioners further say that they brought their grievance to the notice of the Collector and the Divisional Forest Officer of Surguja district but obtained no redress. They have, therefore, invoked the powers of this Court under Art.226 and Art.227 praying