On October 5, 1964, the Secretary of the Goa Mineral ore Exporters Association made a representation to the Secretary, Industries and Labour Department, Government of Goa, Daman and Diu, requesting that all cases in which applications were made and mineral companycession fees were paid prior to October 1, 1963, should be treated by the Government sympathetically and mineral companycessions should be granted.
This, according to companynsel, was much more so with effect from October 1, 1963, on which date the Mines and Minerals Regulation and Development Act, 1957, and the Mineral Concessions Rules, 1960 were extended to Goa.
By a numberification issued by the Lt.
Those applications having been rejected by the Government of Goa on September 29, 1966, respondent 1 filed revision applications to the Central Government which were also rejected in September 1967.
33,000/ .
On October 17, 1964 the appellant applied to the Government of Goa for a prospecting licence in respect of a total area of 2600 hectares, which included the four areas for which respondent I had applied for a mining companycession during the Portuguese rule.
The High Court allowed respondent 1s Writ Petition and quashed the orders dated September 16, 1964, September 18, 1967 and September 29, 1967 whereby respondent 1s applications for mining leases and his revision applications were rejected by the Government.
On the same date, the Parliament enacted the Constitution Twelfth Amendment Act, 1962 whereby Goa, Daman and Diu were added as Entry 5 in Part II of the First Schedule to the Constitution, and as clause d in Article 240 of the Constitution, with retrospective effect from December 20, 1961.
He obtained an order of refund of the amount which he had paid to the Portuguese Government on the applications which were made by him for obtaining mineral companycessions.
31, 33, 34 and 35 of 1958, in respect of an area admeasuring about 400 Hectares.
On August 16, 1966 respondent 1 made four applications for mining leases in respect of the very same area for which he had applied for mineral companycessions during the Portuguese rule and in respect of which the Government of Goa had, as stated above, granted a prospecting licence to the appellant on February 26, 1966.
On September 20, 1967 the Central Government rejected the application of respondent 1 fora mining lease and it is eleven months thereafter that he filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court challenging the various orders passed against him and the order by which a mining lease was granted to the appellant.
These companytentions were rejected by a Constitution Bench of this Court companysisting of Gajendragadkar C. J. and Wanchoo, Hidayatullah, Shah and Sikri JJ.
It was stated on behalf of respondent 1 that it was out of abundant caution that he made fresh applications for mining leases to the Government of Goa after the annexation of Goa.
L. Sanghi, Vinod Bobde, B. R. Agarwal, P. G. Gokhale and Miss Vasudha Sanghi for Respondent No.
He did so after the appellant had obtained a mining lease in his favour on February 26, 1966 and he applied for a lease in respect of the very same areas over which the appellant was granted a mining lease.
It was companytended in the High Court on behalf of respondent 1 that by virtue of the four titles of manifest duly transferred in his favour, he had acquired an indefeasible right to obtain companycessions over the four areas in question even prior to the annexation of Goa, that he had presented applications and paid the necessary fees prior to the said annexation and that therefore, the right which had accrued in his favour companyld number be companysidered as having lapsed on the annexation of Goa by the Government of India.
712, 712 A, 712 712 C of 1968.
It was held by the Court that the mere fact that the old laws were companytinued did number mean that the rights under those laws were recognised by the Government of India and, therefore, the petitioner was number entitled to seek recognition of his import licences from the Government of India.
On March 27, 1962 the Indian Parliament enacted the Goa, Daman and Diu Administration Act, 1 of 1962, replacing the aforesaid ordinance with effect from March 5, 1962.
1440 1443 N of 1970.
It was on August 16, 1966 that he applied for a mining lease under the Indian Law.
The State Government having delayed the grant of a mining lease to the appellant, he filed a revision application to the Central Government under rule 54 of the Rules against the deemed refusal of his application.
In regard to the nature of the right which respondent 1 claimed under the Portuguese law, it is argued by Shri Kacker that the Titles of Manifest obtained by respondent 1 under those laws companyferred upon him numbervested right to obtain the mineral companycessions or mining leases.
N. Kackar, Santosh Chatterjee, A. K. Panda, R. C. Parija and G. S. Chatterjee for the appellant.
In pursuance of the prospecting licence granted to him on A February 26, 1966, the appellant applied for a mining lease on May 8, 1967.
On September 16, 1964, the Mining Engineer, Department of Mines, Goa, informed respondent 1 that since his applications for mineral companycessions had number been granted prior to October 1, 1963 when the Rules came into force, the said applications were deemed to have lapsed.
On December 20, 1961 the Portuguese territories of Goa, Daman and Diu were companyquered by the Government of India, whereupon on December 30, 1961 the Military Governor of the companyquered territory issued a proclamation recognising only certain kinds of import licences, amongst which were number included the licences granted to the petitioner.
The territories companyprised in Goa, Daman and Diu under the Portuguese rule were annexed by the Government of India by companyquest on December 20, 1961.
The companyrectness of the High Courts judgment is questioned in these appeals.
The Notice of Manifest was followed by the grant of Title of Manifest which meant a certificate in terms of the numbere of manifest, pertaining to the legal right to companycession.
By virtue of Article I 3 c of the Constitution of India, these territories became a part of India.
From the judgment and order dated the 20th February, 1970 A of the Delhi High Court in Civil Writs Nos.
In pursuance of the Central Governments recommendation, the Government of Goa granted to the appellant a prospecting licence on February 26, 1966 over an area admeasuring 2425 hectares.
12 of 1962.
In September 1965, the Government of Goa decided to grant a prospecting licence to the appellant in respect of the whole area for which he had applied and sought approval of the Central Government to its proposed action, under section S 2 of the Act.
The object of making a Mining Manifest was to acquire mining rights from the Government in respect of the area companyered by the manifest.
Similar applications filed by other persons were also pending on that date.
According to Shri Kacker, number only did the applications made by respondent 1 prior to the annexation of Goa cease to have existence on December 20, 1961, but the Manifests of Title which were granted to respondent 1 under the previous mining laws, which might have formed the basis for applying for mineral companycessions under the same laws, also came to a termination.
Shri Sanghi tried to distinguish the decision in Pema Chibar by companytending that whereas in that case the dispute was between the Government on the one hand and a citizen on the other, the dispute the instant case is between two individuals, namely, the appellant and respondent 1.
For the purpose of making provision for the administration of the said A territories, the President of India, in exercise of the powers companyferred upon him by Article 123 1 of the Constitution, promulgated on March 5, 1962 ordinance No.
But on February 10, 1966 the Central Government, acting under section 30 of the Act, restored the application of the appellant suo motu and made a recommendation to the Government of Goa that a prospecting licence should be granted to him in respect of an area of 2425 hectares, which included the area in respect of which respondent I had applied for a mineral companycession to the Portuguese Government in September 1959.
This area companyers the areas in respect of which respondent 1 was agitating his right to obtain a mining lease ever since the Portuguese rule.
On September 17, 1959 Respondent I presented four applications attaching to them certain other documents and on September 24, 1959 he paid the balance of the fee prescribed for the grant of mineral companycessions.
Section 4 of the Regulation provided for the repeal and saving of laws.
Such a declaration was called a Mining Manifest and the person making the declaration was called a Manifestor.
M. Abdul Khader, Shobha Dikshit and M. N. Shroff for Respondents Nos.
Respondent 1 was asked, if he so desired, to submit fresh applications for grant of mineral companycessions in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules which, it was stated, would be companysidered on merits.
On November 28, 1962 the President, in exercise of the powers companyferred by Article 240 of the Constitution, promulgated the Goa, Daman and Diu Laws Regulation No.
Shri Kacker, who appears on behalf of the appellant, companytends that there was an interregnum between December 20, 1961, when the Government of India annexed Goa, and March 5, 1962 when the Administration Act was brought into force, as a result of which, laws which were in force in Portuguese Goa immediately before the annexation of Goa cease to apply to that territory with effect from December 20, 1961 until March 5, 1962.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by C CHANDRACHUD, C. J. These appeals are by certificates granted by the Delhi High Court under Article 133 1 a and c of the Constitution in regard to its judgment dated February 20, 1970 in C. W. No.
Since appellants application was number granted within the time prescribed by the Rules, it was deemed to have been rejected.
In between, upon the rejection of his revision application by the Central Government in September 1967, respondent 1 had filed a Writ Petition C.W. No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
On September 5, 1958 one V. J. Keny of Goa had obtained four Titles of Manifest from the Portuguese Government, being Manifests Nos.
The mining companycession was unlimited in duration as long as the companycessionaire companyplied with the companyditions which the law and title of companycession imposed on him.
Similar companymunications were sent by the Department of Mines to 55 other persons whose applications were pending before the Portuguese Government when the Act and the Rules came into force.
2 of 1962, called the Goa, Daman and Diu Administration ordinance.
These companytentions were refuted on behalf of the appellant on the ground that the applications filed by respondent 1 to the Portuguese Government had lapsed on the annexation of Goa by the Government of India, that numberright had accrued in favour of respondent 1 which the Government of Goa, after the annexation of Goa, was under an obligation to recognise and that since the appellants application for a mining lease was granted, respondent 1 had numberright to ask for a lease in respect of the areas which were included in the appellants lease.
Under those laws a person companyld, in stated circumstances, make a declaration in writing stating that he has discovered a mineral deposit.
712 of 1968 in the Delhi High Court on July 23, 1968 challenging the orders of the Government refusing to grant a mining lease to him in respect of the four areas for which he had applied on August 16, 1966.
Respondent I claims preference over the appellant by reason of certain events which happened prior to the companyquest and annexation of Goa by the Government of India on December 20, 1961.
Governor of Goa, Daman and Diu under section 3 of the Regulation, the Mines and Minerals Regulation and Development Act, 1957, and the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, were made applicable to Goa, Daman and Diu with effect from October 1, 1963.
The Notice of Manifest was thus an acknowledgment by public authorities of the authenticity of the Mining Manifest.
On April 20, 1969, the revision application was allowed by the Central Government which directed the State Government to grant a mining lease to the appellant in respect of an area of 918.6050 hectares.
The Title of Manifest entitled the manifestor to a Mining Concession under which he was permitted to explore a mining property and to enjoy thereon all mining rights.
Having failed to obtain recognition for his import licences, the petitioner filed a petition in this Court under Article 32 companytending firstly that under the Administration Act, the previous laws in the Portuguese territories companytinued in force from March 5, 1962, which amounted to recognition by the Government of India of all rights flowing from the previous laws which were in force in the Portuguese territories, and secondly, that section 4 2 of the Regulation preserved all rights and privileges acquired or accrued under the Portuguese law, as a result of which is right under the import licences which were issued to him under the Portuguese law stood preserved.
During the Portuguese rule, matters relating to grant, transfer and vesting of mining rights in Goa, Daman and Diu were governed by the Portuguese Colonial Mining Laws.
The various Acts specified in the Schedule to the Regulation were extended to Goa, Daman and Diu one of such Acts being the Mines and Minerals Regulation and Development Act, 1957.
712 of 1968 The dispute in these appeals relates to the grant of mining rights in respect of an area situated in the villages of Karanzol and Sonaulim in Goa, the rival claimants being the appellant and Respondent 1.
Thus, Goa, Daman and Diu became a part of the Union Territories of India with effect from the date of their annexation by companyquest.
On verification of the facts stated in the Manifest, the companycerned authorities would prepare a Notice of Manifest, by which was meant the record in a special book of prospectors declaration, which in a fixed term will ensure the exclusive right to companycession of a manifested mining property when such property companytains minerals and the manifested land is free.
It was a step in aid to the grant of mining rights, since the particular entry in the special book maintained for keeping the record of mining manifests ensured the exclusive right of the manifestor to mineral companycession or rights.
Article 119 of the Portuguese Colonial Mining Laws provided that a prospecting license, was number transferable but by article 120, a Title of Manifest was transferable by simple endorsement on the original title, duly executed in terms of Article 60.
It was added that the Government held forth numberassurance that the companycessions would be granted.
On September 4, 1959, which was one day before the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which Keny had obtained the Titles of Manifest from the Portuguese Government, Respondent i made four applications, one in respect of each Manifest, to the Governor General of Portugal, attaching with each application the relative Title of Manifest, a challan evidencing payment of the prescribed fee for the grant of mineral companycession and a challan evidencing deposit of the prescribed mileage fee for demarcation of the area in respect of which the mineral companycession was sought.
Some time in 1959, Keny sold those Manifests to Respondent I for Rs.
On the date on which the Act was extended to Goa, Daman and Diu, the applications made by respondent 1 on September 4 and 17, 1959 to the Governor General of Portuguese Goa were pending companysideration for the grant of mineral companycessions.
The sale was in a companyformity with the Portuguese laws and was duly attested by a Notary Public in Goa.
