SLP Nos.
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.
On September 27, 1993, the said Union Minister wrote a letter to the Chief Minister of Orissa stating that the lease area of TISCO should be reduced by half and the balance should be distributed in an equitable manner taking into companysideration the need of genuine companysumers for captive companysumption.
Acting on that report, on the very next day, August 17, 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.
On October 5, 1993, the Central Government superseded its earlier approval dated June 3, 1993, and renewed TISCOs lease over a reduced area of 651 hectares.
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.
The Committee submitted a report dated August 16, 1995, recommending renewal of the lease for a reduced area to TISCO.
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.
Jt set aside the orders dated June 3, 1993 and October 5, 1993, 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 Ferro Alloys Ltd. v. Union of India , 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.
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.
The appellants in these appeals are the Tata Iron and Steel Company, Limited, hereinafter called T1SCO and the Industrial Development Corporation of Orissa Limited hereinafter called IDCOL .
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.
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.
At the same time, in exercise of powers companyferred by Rule 59 2 of the Rules, the Central Government relaxed the provisions of Sub rule 1 with the objective of expediting the process of granting chromite ore and requested the State Government to grant mining leases to four other parties, namely, ICCI, .JSL, IMFA and FACOR for the balance area of 855.476 hectares.
Under the provisions of the Mineral Conservation Development Rules, 1988, framed under Section 18 of the Act, the Indian Bureau of Mines is also required to furnish relevant information to the Central Government.
On November 28, 1992, the State Government, acting on the basis of a favourable report dated March 31, 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 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.
5422/94 and OJC No.
7729 of 1993 and allied matters and 2 the decision of the Central Government dated August 17, 1995 made pursuant to the said judgment of the High Court.
While TISCOs writ petition was pending, ICCL and JSL filed writ Petitions, being OJC No.
While the first four special leave petitions have been filed by TISCO, the last two have been filed by IDCOL.
The principal respondents are the Union of India, the State of Orissa, M s. Indian Charge Chrome Limited, hereinafter called ICCL , Indian Metal Ferro Alloys Limited hereinafter called IMFA , M s. Jindal Strips Limited, hereinafter called JSL , Ferro Alloys Corporation Limited hereinafter called FACOR and Ispat Alloys Limited.
On October 22, 1952, it was granted a mining lease over an area of 1813 hectares for chromite for a period of 20 years.
It applied to the Raja of Sukinda for a prospecting licence and was granted the same in 1952.
These appeals seek to challenge i the companymon judgment and order of the Orissa High Court dated April 4, 1995, arising out of OJC No.
After the judgment of the High Court was delivered on April 4, 1995, a Committee was companystituted by the Ministry of Mines, 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 to TISCO.
22710/95, 23131/95 and 23132/95 seek to challenge the Central Governments decision dated August 17, 1995, made pursuant to the High Courts order dated April 4, 1995.
Special Leave granted.
7054/94, 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.
M. Ahmadi, CJ.
On June, 3, 1993, the Central Government authorised the renewal of the lease over the entire area of 1261.476 hectares.
10838/95, 11391/95 and 11392/95 seek to challenge the order dated April 4,1995 of the Orissa High Court and SLP Nos.
