JUDGMENT

Mohd Radzi Harun J:

Grounds

Background

[1] The Applicant in both of these Judicial Review applications applied for mandamus, certiorari and application related to a certain mining lease awarded to Ecostrength Sdn Bhd.

[2] This Court had dismissed both applications.

[3] These Grounds shall apply to the appeals in both applications.

Finding

[4] This decision addresses both Judicial Review applications by Geonex in CA-25-7-07/2024 against Jabatan Mineral and PTG Pahang, and in CA-25-5- 09/2023 against PTG Pahang and Ecostrength.

[5] In CA-25-7-07/2024, Geonex prayed for the following orders:

(a) Mandamus supaya Responden-Responden beri kesemua kebenaran dan/atau kelulusan yang diwajibkan kepada Pemohon untuk:

i) mengakses ke lombong di Lot 26644, Sungai Rawit, Mukim Semantan, Daerah Temerloh, Negeri Pahang yang kini dikenali sebagai Lot 27716, Kg Somik, Mukim Semantan, Temerloh, Pahang (Tapak tersebut);

ii) membina kilang memproses di Tapak tersebut bagi memproses bahan-bahan mentah yang telah dilombong oleh Pemohon di Tapak tersebut;

iii) memproses bahan-bahan mentah yang telah dilombong oleh Pemohon di Tapak tersebut kepada bijih-bijih besi (raw material to saleable product);

iv) membawa keluar bijih-bijih besi dari Tapak tersebut; dan

v) menjual mineral yang telah diproses oleh Pemohon dari Tapak tersebut; dan

(b) Pemohon diberi kebebasan untuk memohon lain-lain perintah yang berkaitan dan mendapatkan kerja sama dari Jabatan-jabatan yang berkaitan

[6] In CA-25-5-09/2023 Geonex v. PTG Pahang and Ecostrength, Geonex prayed for:

(a) Certiorari: membatalkan keputusan PTG Pahang bertarikh 18 November 2022 yang membenarkan dan memberikan suatu pajakan melombong ML. 06/2022 kepada 2nd Respondent atau Ecostrength Sdn Bhd;

(b) Declaration: Suatu deklarasi bahawa pajakan melombong ML.06/2022 yang diberikan oleh 1st Respondent atau Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Negeri Pahang kepada 2nd Respondent atau Ecostrength Sdn Bhd pada 18 November 2022 adalah tidak sah dan tidak boleh dikuatkuasakan;

(c) Mandamus: Suatu perintah mandamus bahawa PTG Pahang hendaklah membenarkan permohonan Pemohon untuk suatu pajakan melombong untuk tempoh 9 June 2020 sehingga 8 June 2022, dan untuk tempoh 9 June 2022 sehingga 8 June 2024 bagi pihak Bayu Mining Sdn Bhd.

[7] The core issue to be decided by this Court revolves around the applicant's application for renewal of the mining lease dated 16 July 2019 purportedly in the name of Bayu Mining, which was meant to be a 3rd Renewal although made by the Applicant but was correctly submitted in the name of Bayu Mining, and that the consequent action and decision by PTG to reject the renewal application mainly because the application was made by the applicant's representative and not Bayu Mining, the mining lease holder, was illegal and irrational.

[8] The PTG had issued the appropriate explanation vide its letter dated 16 December 2020 indicating unequivocally that the renewal application must be done by Bayu Mining in compliance with the Mineral Enactment, particularly s 66 of the Enactment.

[9] One only needs to read s 66 of the Pahang Mineral Enactment which provides:

(1) A mining lease shall be granted for the maximum economic life of the mine or mining operations, as the case may be, but shall not exceed an initial term of twenty-one years.

(2) A mining lease may be renewed in whole or in part for a term based on the economic life of the mine or mining operations, as the case may be, but such renewal shall not exceed twenty-one years.

(3) An application for renewal of a mining lease shall be made to the Director in the prescribed form at least twelve months prior to the expiry of the mining lease.

(4) The Director shall, as soon as practicable upon receiving the application for renewal of a mining lease, register the application in such manner as may be prescribed.

(5) Where an application for renewal of a mining lease is made to the Director at least twelve months prior to the expiry of the lease the Director shall, within six m