The second, dated 10.4.1963, was for a period of 15 years in respect of an area of 777.60 hectares at Nongmawait.
The third one dated 8.6.1967 was for a period of 15 years and companyered an area of 363 hectares at Wamsophi.
This writ petition came up for hearing on earlier occa sions but it was adjourned from time to time as the same issue was pending decision in this Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Ram Kishan Ors.,
The three lease deeds were to expire on 26.5.77, 9.4.78 and 7.6.82 respectively but there was a clause for further renewal.
The petitioner companypany had also established a refractory Plant in 1961 near Ramgarh in District Hazaribagh.
1472 77 of 1987.
It ap pears, however, that petitioner faced a number of difficul ties in operating the refractory plant and was explaining its difficulties to the State of Maghalaya which was formed in 1970.
Between 1970 to 1972, the Union of India, through its public sector companypanies, Hindustan Steel Ltd. and Bokaro Steel Ltd. negotiated with the petitioner for the purchase of its refractory plant and also for having the mining leases transferred to them.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India Kapil Sibal, A.K. Sen, P.C. Jain, Ranbir Chandra, A. Minocha and Ms. Indu Goswami for the Petitioners.
termination of the said mining leases held by M s. Assam Sillimanite Ltd. Now, therefore, the Govt.
of Meghalaya in exercise of the powers companyferred by Sec.
Though the refractory plant was number functioning properly and was on the verge of closure, the petitioner was number willing to transfer its mining leases to the public sector companypanies but was willing to supply the required quantity of sillimanite to the Bakaro Steel Plant.
It, however, appears that Hindustan Steel Ltd. had taken possession of the properties in question and the interim stay was also vacated on 20th of January, 1987.
4A of the Mines and Minerals Regulation Development Act, 1957, as amended by the Mines and Minerals Regulation Development Amended Act, 1972, the Central Govt.
of Meghalaya to make a premature .
Though several objections have been raised to the action of the State Government in the writ petition, including a challenge to the validity of section 4A, the arguments before us were restricted by Shri P.C. Jain to only two aspects.
Lease Locality Area in Period of Date of No.
It is also stated that some negotiations took place as a result of which the petitioner was planning to re open the factory on 6.11.
Civil Appeals Nos.
has requested the Govt.
However, in the meantime on the 2nd of November, 1972, the Central Government took over the management of the refractory plant under section 18 AA of the Industries Development Regulation Act, 1951.
4A 1 of the Mines and Minerals Regulation Development Act, 1957, as amended by the Mines Minerals Regulation Development Amendment Act, 1972 hereby terminates prematurely the mining leases of sillimanite mentioned below held by M s. Assam Sillimanite Ltd. with immediate effect and grants fresh mining leases over the same areas in favour of M s. Hindustan Steel Ltd., a Government Company, fully owned by the Central Government.
having companysulted the Govt.
hecteres Lease expiry Lalmati 129.60 15 years 24.4.1977 Nongmawait 777.60 do 9.4.1978 Wamsophi 363.00 do 7.6.1982 The petitioner filed a writ petition in the Gauhati High Court against the order dated 7.12.
He submitted that, admittedly, numbernotice had been issued by the State Government before terminating the leases prematurely.
This take over was challenged by the petitioner companypany but its chal lenge was repelled by the Delhi High Court and a Special Leave Petition was filed, which is pending in this Court.
1972 but it was number able to obtain any ex parte interim orders.
133/72 Whereas the Central Govt.,
Where the State Government, after companysultation with the Central Government, is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of regulation of mines and mineral development, preservation of natural environment, companytrol of floods, prevention of pollution or to avoid danger to public health or companymunications or to ensure safetyof buildings, monuments or other structures or for such other purposes, as the State Government may deem fit, it may, by an order, in respect of any minor mineral, make premature termination of a prospecting licence or mining lease with respect to the area or any part thereof companyered by such licence or lease Provided that the State Government may, after the premature termination of a prospecting licence or mining lease under sub section 1 or sub section 2 , as the case may be, grant a prospecting licenee or mining lease in favour of such Government companypany or companyporation owned or companytrolled by Government as it may think fit.
1973, this Court issued rule nisi and also directed the maintenance of the status quo pending numberice.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
In pursuance of the 1972 amendment, the State Government passed an order terminating the mining leases granted to the petitioner and granted fresh leases over the same areas in favour of M s. Hindustan Steel Ltd., a Government companypany, fully owned by the Central Government.
No order making a premature termination of a prospect ing licence or mining lease shall be made except after giving the holder of the licence or lease a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
The present position, therefore, is that the mining leases have been granted to the Hindustan Steel Ltd. and they have also been operating the mines for the past several years.
of Meghalaya, is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of mineral regulation and development that the mining leases of sillimanite mentioned below held by M s. Assam Sillimanite Ltd. having its Registered Office at 13 A.T. Road, Gauhati in Meghalaya are terminated forth with And, whereas, in terms of Sec.
105 of 1973.
The first was a lease deed dated 25.4.1952 for a period of 15 years in respect of an area of 129.60 hectares at Lalmati.
The order, made in the name of the Governor, reads as follows Dated, Shillong 7th Dec., 1972.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATHAN, J. The petitioner companypany obtained mining leases from the Government of Assam to extract sillimanite in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills District.
Our task in the present writ petition has been companysiderably simplified because the above civil appeals have been disposed of by this Court by its judgment dated 6th May, 1988, which is reported in 1988 3 S.C.C. 416.
In pursuance there of, three lease deeds were executed by the State Government in favour of the petitioner.
Kuldip Singh, Additional Solicitor General, M.M. Abdul Khadar, L.N. Sinha, V.C. Mahajan, R.B. Dattar, A.K. Gangui, B. Misra, Ms. A. Subhashini, D.N. Mukharjee, R.P. Gupta, V.S.N. Chart, Mrs. Binu Tamta, Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, Ms. Manjula Gupta and Badrinath for the Respondents.
The petition was withdrawn from the Gauhati High Court and the present peti tion under Article 32 has been filed in this Court.
