DHARAMBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this special leave petition against the judgment of the High court of Punjab and Haryana made on 9/7/1996 in CWP No. 9624 of 1996. The petitioner had applied for mining lease and the prospecting licence claiming that he had discovered limestone minerals in Bhemdemti Dostpur, Mohindergarh District in the State of Haryana. The government has notified that area under Rule 59 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. The petitioner challenged the reservation of the area in revision before the central government and prayed for grant of the lease in his favour. The Mines tribunal of the central government while setting aside the notification issued by the State government, declined to grant mining lease to the petitioner staling that the State government had done so in its discretion and that the central government would not curtail the said discretion as it is its property. The High court dismissed the writ petition in limine. Hence this special leave petition

(2.) Shri Rohtagi, learned counsel for the petitioner, placing reliance on Ss. (2 of Section 11 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, contended that the petitioner having filed an application for mining lease has got preferential right and the Mines tribunal and the High court were not right in rejecting his prayer. We find no force in the contention. Section II of the Act reads as under:

(3.) Ss. (1 of Section 11 envisages grant of a prospecting licence in respect of a land and a prospecting licensee has a preferential right for obtaining a mining lease in respect of the land over any other person; provided, however, that the conditions enumerated in clauses (a) to (c) in proviso thereto are satisfied. Further, Ss. (2 states that subject to the provisions of Ss. (1, where two or more persons have applied for a prospecting licence or a mining lease in respect of the same land, the applicant whose application was received earlier, shall have a preferential right for the grant of the licence or lease, as the case may be, over an applicant whose application was received later. It is also, again, subject to the conditions enumerated in the proviso. Ss. (3 is not material for the purposes of this case. Ss. (4 further provides that notwithstanding anything contained in Ss. (2, but subject to the provisions of Ss. (1, the State government, may for any special reasons to be recorded and with the previous approval of the central government grant a prospecting licence or a mining lease to an applicant whose application was received later in preference to an applicant whose application was received earlier