This review application was allowed by the Central Government on January 28, 1954, and the Government of Orissa was directed to grant a mining lease to the third respondent with respect to two out of the five areas.
K. Daphtary.
C. Chatterjee, J. B. Dadachanji, S. N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the appellant.
Thereafter the appellant was granted certificates of approval in respect of prospecting licences and mining leases.
47 D of 1955, arising out of the judgment and order dated November 28, 1955 of the said High Court in Writ Petition No.
He was, however, informed on July 5, 1955, by the Government of Orissa of the order passed by the Central Government on January 28, 1954, by which the lease granted to him by the State of Orissa with respect to two areas was cancelled.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated February 25, 1959, of the Punjab High Court Circuit Bench at Delhi in Letters Patent Appeal No.
The writ petition was heard by a learned Single Judge of the High Court and it was held that the order was number a quasi judicial order but merely an administrative one and that there being numberlis, the appellant was number entitled to a hearing.
Consequently, the third respondent was asked on July 24, 1950, to deposit a sum of Rs.
428 of 1959.
500, which it did on August 3, 1950.
Solicitor General of India, R. Gapapathy Iyer, R. H. Dhebar and T. M. Sen, for respondents Nos.
The appellants companyplaint is that he came to know in February, 1954, that the third respondent had applied to the Central Government under r. 52 for review.
Shri N. C. Chatterji appearing on behalf of the appellant companytends that the Central Government was acting in a quasi judicial capacity when it passed the order under r. 54 of the Rules and therefore it was incumbent upon it to hear the appellant before deciding the review application, and inasmuch as it did number do so it companytravened the principles of natural justice which apply in such a case and the order is liable to be quashed.
It seems, however, that the third respondent had applied for review to the Central Government under r. 52 of the Rules.
In the result, the writ petition failed.
Eventually, the appellant applied on December 19, 1949, for mining leases for manganese in respect of five areas in the district of Sundergarh Orissa .
306 D of 1954.
In support of this, learned companynsel relies on Nagendra Nath Bora and another v. The Commissioner of Hills Division and Appeals, Assam and others 1 , and submits that rr.
S. Pathak, S. S. Shukla and Mrs. E. Udayaratnam, for respondent No.
The appellant went up in Letters Patent Appeal to a Division Bench of the High Court, which upheld the order of the learned Single Judge.
The appellant then applied for a certificate to permit him to appeal to this Court which was granted and that is how the matter has companye up before us.
He thereupon addressed a letter to the Central Government praying that he might be given a hearing before any order was passed on the review application.
These applications were number accompanied by the deposit required under r. 29 of the Rules.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by WANCHOO J. This appeal upon a certificate granted by the Punjab High Court raises the question whether an order of the Central Government under r. 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1949, hereinafter called the Rules framed under s. 6 of the Mines and Minerals Regulation and Development Act, No.
It was therefore asked on September 5, 1950, to send a separate application in the prescribed form for each block and thereupon it submitted fresh applications on September 6, 1950.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The brief facts necessary for this purpose are these.
Some defects were pointed out in these applications and therefore the appellant submitted fresh applications on September 6, 1950, after removing the defects.
January 19.
It was then found that the third respondents applications were defective.
It was held that the appellants applications were prior and therefore the leases were granted to him.
53 of 1941, hereinafter called the Act is quasi judicial or administrative.
Thereafter on April 21, 1953, possession of the areas leased was delivered to the appellant.
He was asked on July 4, 1950, to submit a separate application for each area which he did on July 27, 1950.
In the meantime, the third respondent also made applications for mining leases for manganese for the same area on July 10, 1950.
Eventually, on December 22, 1952, the State of Orissa granted the mining leases of the five areas to the appellant taking into account r. 32 of the Rules, which prescribed priority.
The appellant was granted a mining lease by the then Ruler of Gangpur State on December 30, 1947, shortly before the merger of that State with the State of Orissa on January 1, 1948.
This lease was annulled on June 29, 1949.
Consequently, he made an application under Art.
