P R NAYAK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution the Petitioner prays lor an order of certioran to quash the order dated 3-3-1969 made by the Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum, Chemical and Mines and Metals in its revisional jurisdiction under R. 55 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

(2.) Shortly stated, the facts leading to the petition are these: By a notification dated 12-1-1967, the Government ol Mysore, invited applications for the grant of a license for a mining lease in respect of 810 acres of land, out of forest survey No. 2 of Atli Village, in Supa Taluka of North Kanara District. The Petitioner and respondent-3 among others submitted their applications on the same date, for the grant of a license. After considering the case of the applicants, the State Government in exercise of its powers under S. 11 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, and after obtaining the approval of the Central Government, issued a notification dated 23-8-1967 sanctioning the grant of a Mining Lease to the petitioner in respect of the said land to the extent of 810 acres. On 12-2-1968, the petitioner executed a registered lease for a period of twenty years and thereafter commenced stripping work to explore the workable deposits investing some capital. It is stated that he also exploited some iron ore and delivered it to the Mines and Metal Trading Corporation.

(3.) Against the grant of lease in favour of the petitioner, respondent No. 3 which is a private limited Company, preferred a revision application to the Central Government under R. 54 of the Rules. The copy of the the revision application is Annexure C to the writ petition. In the grounds of revision, it is stated that the State Government had failed to apply the matters specified in S. 11(3) of the Act while considering the comparative merits of the applicants. It is further stated that it possesses special knowledge and better experience in the iron ore business; that in the matter of financial resources, it has a paid up capital of five lakhs of rupees, and that it has better qualified technical staff. It appears from the records that in, the begining, the petitioner was not a party to the revision application but was later impleaded. The copy of the revision application was sent to the State Government for their comments which were sent as per Annexure dated 16-1-1968. The Central Government by their letter dated 13-6-1969 forwarded a copy of the revision application along with the comments of the State Government to the petitioner inviting his comments thereon. On 2-9-1968, the petitioner sent his comments as per Annexure D. Therein, he has denied the superior special knowledge and experience in mining claimed by respondent No. 3. He has stated that he has got seventeen years of experience in mining in the area in which the lease of land is in question, and that he has more qualified technical staff at his disposal with adequate financial resources. He has further staled that during the last three years he had taken up iron ore mining in Anmode Sector I and supplied -about 70,000 tonnes of iron fore to the Mineral and Metals Tradng Corporation of India, with a current contract with the Corporation to supply 80,000 tonnes of iron ore. On these among other grounds, he sought to justify the grant in his favour.