126, 127, 128, 129 and 130 of 1951.
300 of 1951.
132 1 of the Constitution of India from a. judgment dated 2nd August, 1951, of the High Court of Judicature at Orissa Ray C.J. and Narasimham J. in Miscellaneous Judicial Cases Nos.
It is however companymon ground that there was numberregistered lease in favour of any of the respondents before 1947.
301 and 304.
Thereafter, the respondents, along with others approached the Orissa Government to give them leases and the State Government gave them temporary permits to work the mines in November, 1949.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Cases Nos.
Roshan Lal for the respondents in Cases Nos.
This annulment was made expressly on the ground that these companymitments were number reasonable and bona fide.
On the 14th December, 1947, the Ruler of Keonjhar entered into a merger agreement with the Dominion of India and as from the 1st January, 1948, the State was merged in the Dominion of India.
172/1B dated 23rd March, 1948, of the Government of India, the Government of Orissa issued a numberification dated the 8th of June, 1949, declaring, inter alia, the said leases to be void and number binding on it.
Some of the petitioners alleged that they had spent money on the development of the mines and installed machinery to work the same.
300 to 304 of 1951.
the Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA C.J. These are five companypanion appeals from the judgment of the High Court at Orissa, delivered on five petitions filed by the respondent in each of the appeals, to obtain from the Court a writ of mandamus and or directions under article 226 of the Constitution of India.
On the 3rd July, 1951, however they passed an order cancelling the temporary per mits and directed the respondents to remove their assets appertaining to the respective mines within a fortnight.
C. Chatterjee A. N. Roy and A.N. Sinha, with him for the respondent in Case No.
After signing the merger agreement the Ruler gave registered leases on the 27th December, 1947, to the respondents in these appeals.
C. Chatterjee H.J. Umrigar and A.N. Roy, with him for the respondent in Case No.
Each of the respondents alleged that between 1941 and 1947 he had agreed to take from the Ruler of Keonjhar a mining lease and had entered into possession of the area.
303 of 1951.
October 25.
302 of 1951.
In pursuance of the exercise of the powers companyferred on the Government of Orissa by section 4 of the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1949, read with Notifica tion No.
C. Chatterjee A. N. Roy, with him for the respondent in Case No.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India G. N. Joshi, with him for the appellant in all the appeals.
