On November 28, 1992, the State Government, acting on the basis of a favourable report dated March 31.
Government of .India, under the Chairmanship of one Shri S.D. Sharma for rehearing and reconsidering the issue in regard to the renewal of mining lease lo TISCO.
While TISCOs writ petition was pending, ICCL and JSL filed writ .Petitions, being OJC No.
and directed the Central Government to hear the application for renewal of the lease, keeping in view the report submitted by the Rao Committee and the decision of this Court in the aforesaid case.
On September 27, 1993, the said Union Minister wrote a letter to the Chief Minister of Orissa stating that the lease urea of TISCO should be reduced by half and the balance should be distributed in an equitable manner taking in to companysideration the need to genuine companysumers for captive companysumption.
On October 3, 1991, more than a, year prior to the date of expiry of the lease, TISCO applied for a second renewal under Section 8 3 of the Act for a further period of 20 years.
However, before the formal lease companyld be executed, the Union Minister of State for Steel Mines, acting on a companyplaint filed by Shri G.C. Munda, Member of Parliament, directed that the matter be kept in abeyance.
The reasons for the reduction were also provided.
5422/94 and OJC No.
this Court had appointed a Committee headed by the Secretary to the Government of India in the Ministry of Mines.
Since the lease was to expire on January 12, 1973, TISCO sought its renewal which was duly granted under Section 8 2 .in respect of 1261.476 hectares for a period of 20 years i.e. till January 11, 1993, Subject to the companydition that it would set up a beneficiation plant.
By its impugned order dated April 4, 1995 the High Court of Orissa struck down the renewal of TISCOs lease granted by the Central Government through its decisions dated June 3, 1993 and October 5, 1993.
On April 27, 1993, the Indian Bureau of Mines, after analysing the mining plan submitted by TISCO, recommended to the Central Government that TISCOs lease be renewed in its entirety.
1 SCO 91.
JUDGEMENT 1996 SCR 3 SUPP 808 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by AHMADI, CJI Special Leave granted.
made pursuant to the High Courts order dated April 4.
for a prospecting licence and was granted the same in 1.952.
After the judgment of the High Court was delivered on April 4, 1995, a Committee was companystituted by the Ministry of Mines.
challenging the renewal of TISCOs lease by the Central Government both the order dated June 3, 1993 which had authorised the renewal of the entire lease area of 1261 hectares and the order dated October 5, 1993 which subsequently reduced the authorisation to 651 hectares were challenged.
They may be heard by way of fair play and in companypliance with the principles of natural justice, and to enable them to place on record such necessary facts for essential companysideration by the Central Government.
In the case of TISCO, after taking into account, all the technical grounds and objections put forth by the learned companynsel for TISCO, the Committee came to the companyclusion that its lease should be granted renewal for a period of 20 years over a companytiguous area of 461 hectares.
the Committee rejected the arguments put forth by TISCO to dilute the significance of the Rao Report for the companysideration of the present dispute.
The principal respondents are the Union of India, the State of Orissa, M s. Indian Charge Chrome Limited, hereinafter called ICCL , Indian Metal Fcrro Alloys Limited hereinafter called IMFA , M s. Jindal Strips Limited, hereinafter called JSL , Ferro Alloys Corporation Limited hereinafter called FACOR and Ispat Alloys Limited.
SLP Nos.
On October 19.
By its order dated August 17, 1995, the Central Government while endorsing the finding of the Committee recommended to the Slate Government that TISCOs lease be renewed for 20 years over a reduced area of 406 hectares.
August 17.
On June, 3, 1993, the Central Government authorised the renewal of the lease over the entire area of 1261.476 hectares.
22710/95, 23131/95 and 23132/95 .seek to challenge the Central Governments, decision dated August 17, 1995.
7729 of 1993 and allied matters and 2 the decision of the Central Government dated August 17.
On October 5, 1993, the Central Government superseded its earlier approval dated June 3, 1993, and renewed TISCOs lease over a reduced area of 651 hectares.
These appeals seek to challenge i the companymon judgment and order of the Orissa High Court dated April 4, 1995.
On October 22, 1952, it was granted a mining lease over an area of 1813 hectares for chromite for a period of 20 years.
The decision of the Committee and the companysequent order of the Central Government have been assailed by the learned companynsel for TISCO on a number technical grounds.
The factual matrix of the case is as follows The appellant, TISCO,.is a limited companypany, one of whose primary objects has been to carry on business as a mining industry.
1995 made pursuant to the said judgment of the High Court.
1995, the Central Government authorised the renewal of TISCOs lease over the reduced area of 406 hectares which, according to the Central Government, would meet TISCOs captive requirements and requested the State Government to issue orders for the same.
The appellants in these appeals are the Tata Iron and Steel Company, Limited, hereinafter called TISCO and the Industrial Development Corporation of Orissa Limited hereinafter called IDCOL .
It applied to the Raja of Sukinda.
7054/94,.
The High Court took numbere of the decision of this Court in Indian Metals, case where, faced with a dispute involving the grant of rights for the mining of chromite ore in the State of Orissa.,
Mr. B.K. Rao hereinafter called The Rao Committee to companysider the claims of the various parties.
Thereafter, it directed the Central Government to reconsider TISCOs Application for renewal of the lease in accordance with law the Central Government was also directed to give a personal hearing to, and companysider the applications of, the other parties before the Court.
inter alia on the ground that the Central Government had number kept in view the recommendation made by the Rao Committee which was accepted by this Court in the case of Indian Materials Faro Alloys Ltd. v. Union of India, AJR 1991 SC 818 1992 Supp.
Subsequently, under the provisions of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1952, on the rights of the Raja having vested in the State Government, the latter recognised the lease of TISCO for a period of 20 years with effect from January 12, 1953.
1993, TLSCO filed a writ petition in the High Court, being OJC No.
arising out of OJC No.
While the first four special leave petitions have been filed by TISCO the last two have been filed by IDCOL.
Acting on that report, on the very next day.
10838/95, 11391/95 and .11392/95 seek to challenge the order dated April 4, 1995 of the Orissa High Court and SLP Nos.
1992 submitted by the Director of Mines Geology Orissa, recommended to the Central Government that the entire lease of TISCO be renewed for a period of 10 years under Section 8 3 of the Act.
The Committee submitted a report dated August 16, 1995, recommending renewal of the lease for a reduced area to TISCO.
