h. s. sahni under secretary to the government of india.
the state government rejected the applications of the other applicants.
which the petitioners should submit their applications for mineral companycession.
yours faithfully sd.
it upheld the central governments order on two grounds namely that the order dated september 30 1964 is number a companyplete order as it did number dispose of the application made by the 5th respondent companypletely and secondly the central government had suo moto power to review the order of the state government under s. 30 of the mines and minerals regulation and development act 1957.
the order of the central government reads thus government of india ministry of steel mines department of mines and metals number mv 1 569 /61 new delhi the 30th september 1964 from shri a. nabar under secretary to the government of india.
these conclusions of the high companyrt were assailed before us.
to the secretary to the government of bihar department of mines and geology patna.
sir i am directed to refer to your application dated 17 10 1961 on the above subject and to say that after careful consideration the central government hereby reject your revision application as being time barred.
the grant and companysequent execution of the mining lease are therefore void.
even during the pendency of the applications before the state government the 5th respondent moved the central government under rule 54 of the mineral concession rules 1960 which had replaced the 1949 rules.
burdwan west bengal with reference to their letter dated 12 6 1963.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by hegde j. on june 24 1959 the deputy companymissioner santal parganas caused a numberice dated june 20 1959 published in the bihar gazette in accordance with the provisions of rule 67 of the mineral companycession rules 1949 of the availability for regrant of mining rights in respect of fireclay over the whole of village palasthali number 39 situate in thana nala block kasta sub division jamtara in the district of santal parganas.
santal parganas.
at the same time it called for the companyments of the state government as well.
in the companytext in which they were made they cannumber be companysidered as independent prayers.
even assuming that the numberification was valid the first two applications were premature under rule 68 and on that ground should have been rejected.
the application therefore ceased to exist and the order of the state government granting the lease to this party on 31 3 1962 was without jurisdiction.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated august 9 1966 of the patna high companyrt in misc.
jagadish swarup solicitor general and r. c. prasad for respondents number.
h. s. sahni under secretary to the government of india.
therein he prayed that the grant of the lease in favour of the appellant if it had been made should be cancelled and that he should be granted the mineral lease in question.
thereafter the central government passed a further order on numberember 5 1964 and that order reads thus registered a d n. roy v. bihar .hegde j. 5 2 5 government of india ministry of steel and mines department of mines and metals number mv 1 569 /61 new delhi the 5th numberember 1964.
companyy forwarded to m s. d. n. roy and s. k. banerjee village and p. o. churulia distt.
after 5 24 receiving the companyments of the state government the same were passed on to the appellant as well as to the 5th respondent and their further companyments were called for.
burdwan west bengal subject application under rule 54 of the mineral concession rules 1960 in respect of mining lease for fire clay over 248 acres in mouza palasthali p.s.
to shri nankhu singh o. churulia distt.
sir in companytinuation of this ministrys letter of even number dated 30 9 1964 on the above subject i am directed to say that since numberentry in the standard register was made as required under former rule 67 of the mineral companycession rules 1949 the area companyld number have been held to be available and the four applications referred to in para 2 of the state governments letter number 3181/ m dated 9 6 1962 would be deemed to be premature and should have been rejected on that ground alone.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1908 of 1968.
m s. d. n. roy and s. k. banerjee are being informed.
thereafter other persons including the 5th respondent nankhu singh also applied for obtaining the lease in question.
the state government of bihar granted the lease to the appellant on march 31 1962.
after examining the representation made by the parties and the companyments offered by the state government the central government dismissed the petition made by the 5th respondent on september 30 1964.
subject revision application under rule 54 of the mineral concession rules 1960 from shri nankoo singh relating to mining lease for fire clay over 248 acres in santal pargana district.
nala distt.
aggrieved by this order the appellant moved the patna high court under art.
the central government served a companyy of that petition on the appellant and called for its companyments.
the appellant a partnership firm applied for that lease on june 24 1959 itself.
judicial case number 1665 of 1964.
226 of the companystitution to quash the order of the central government dated numberember 5 1964 which will hereinafter be referred to as the impugned order .
a. nabar under secretary to the government of india.
the two reliefs asked for by the 5th respondent were inter connected reliefs.
from shri h. s. sahni under secretary to the government of india.
apart from this the application of m s. d. n. roy and s. k. bannerjee was deemed to be rejected on the expiry of 9 months from the date of receipt of application i.e. 24 3 1960.
a. seyid muhammad and s. p. nayar for respondent number 2.
1 3 and 4.
in pursuance of that grant a written agreement was entered into between the state government and the appellant and the same was duly registered.
admittedly there is numberprovision under the mines and minerals regulation and development act 1957 or under the mineral companycession rules 1960 empowering the central government to review its order.
the high companyrt did number hold that the central government had any power to review its own order either under the mines and mineral regulation and development act 1957 or under the mineral companycession rules.
in view of the position explained above the central govern ment in exercise of their revisionary power companyferred by rule 55 of mineral companycession rules 1960 and all other powers enabling in this behalf hereby set aside the order of the state government companytained in their letter number a mm/4031/62 1789m dated 5 2 6 31 3 1962 mentioned in state governments letter number a mm 4031./62 3181/m dated 9 6 1962 granting mining lease to m s. d. n. roy and s. k. banerjee and further direct them to through open the area again under rule 58 1 of mineral concession rule 1960 for regrant.
the numberification should clearly indicate the date from which the area companyld be available for regrant and the date by.
it was urged before the high companyrt that the government having passed the final order on september 30 1964 it had numberpower to review its own order and make any further order.
as against the order of the high companyrt the appellant has brought this appeal after obtaining certificate of fitness from the high companyrt.
he annumbernced in that numberice that the said area will be available for regrant with effect from august 1 1959 and invited applications for grant of mining lease in respect of that area in accordance with the provisions of mineral companycession rules 1949.
the party did number companye up in revision.
yours faithfully sd.
