ASHOK KUMAR LINGALA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant order we propose to dispose of two writ petitions, i.e., WP Nos. 17281/2010 (Ashok Kumar Lingala v. State of Karnataka and Ors. WP Nos. 17281/2010) & WP No. 18043/2010 (Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Company Ltd. v. State of Karnataka and Ors. WP No. 18043/2010) Although the latter petition was filed later in point of time, but for purposes of narration of facts chronologically, it will be appropriate to narrate the facts in WP No. 18043/2010 first, and thereafter, to advert to the facts in WP No. 17281/2010.

(2.) M/s Sandur Manganse & Iron Ores Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'M/s Simore') was granted an iron ore mining lease as far back as in 1954. The renewal thereof, was granted on 25.4.2008 with effect from 1.1.1984. The aforesaid renewal extended the mining lease, earlier granted to the 'M/s Simore', upto 31.12.2013. It would also be relevant to mention that although originally when the lease was granted to 'M/s Simore', the leasing area was to the extent of approximately 29 sq. miles, the same was reduced in the renewal lease to 1816 sq. hectares. We are informed that the aforesaid area over which 'M/s Simore' is presently permitted to mine iron ore, extends to approximately 18.50 sq. miles.

(3.) Ashok Kumar Lingala (the Petitioner in W.P. No. 17281/2010) filed an application for the grant of a mining lease, on 19.2.2005. Before the final mining lease could be granted to him, requisite permissions had to be sought from the Tahsildar, Sandur, the Land Tribunal Sandur, the Deputy Commissioner, Bellary, as also the Director of Mines and Geology. After these permissions were duly granted at the hands of the aforesaid authorities, the State Government also approved the grant of an iron ore mining lease to Ashok Kumar Lingala. The claim of Ashok Kumar Lingala was then forwarded to the Central Government, as the approval of the Central Government is also an essential prerequisite before such a lease is granted by the State Government. The Central Government having accepted and approved the recommendation made by the State Government, a mining lease was eventually granted in the name of Ashok Kumar Lingala through a notification dated 15.1.2010. As per the said notification the mining lease granted to Ashok Kumar Lingala extended to an area of 4.42 hectares. Before the execution of a registered lease deed with Ashok Kumar Lingala a communication dated 31.1.2010 was issued for the demarcation of the boundaries over which the said lease would extend. After the demarcation of the boundaries had been carried out, a registered mining lease deed was executed by the State Government with Ashok Kumar Lingala on 6.2.2010. The registered mining lease, enclosed therewith a site plan, as also, the exact depiction of the boundaries (over which the applicant Ashok Kumar Lingala would have a right to excavate iron ore). The only difference between the notification dated 15.1.2010 and the eventual registered mining lease dated 6.2.2010 was, that the lease dated 6.2.2010 authorised Ashok Kumar Lingala to carryout mining operations over an area of 3.36 hectares only, as against 4.42 hectares originally approved. The instant alteration was occasioned, by the physical demarcation of boundaries which revealed that only 3.36 hectares of land was available for mining.