INFRASTRUCTURE LOGISTICS PVT LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue which arises in the two appeals above captioned is whether in exercise of its revisional power the Central Government has correctly opined that the order passed by the State Government granting mineral concessionaire rights to the appellants suffers from an erroneous approach in law and also ignores relevant facts requiring the matter to be reconsidered by the State Government and whether the view taken by the learned Single Judge upholding the remand is correct.

(2.) THE relevant facts to be noted are that on October 12, 2006 the Government of Maharashtra issued a notification inviting applications from those who were desirous of mineral concessions over the areas mentioned in the notification; and pertaining to District Ratnagiri, two areas ad measuring 42.35 hectares and 158.871 hectares were listed in Survey numbers Ambivali Gat No.13 to 16, 50, 63, 65 and Kante 3, 4, 10 to 15, 18 to 25, 28. It was indicated that the mineral Bauxite Ore was to be mined in the said two areas. Seventeen applicants submitted applications, and since we are primarily concerned with the inter se dispute between the appellant Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and the two contesting respondents in the two appeals, being Aakash Universal Ltd., the respondent No.3 in LPA No.243/2012 and M/s.Ashapura Minechem Ltd., the respondent No.4 in LPA No.237/2012, we note that all three, apart from fourteen more, were the applicants desirous of mineral concessions over both areas at Ambivali and Kante.

(3.) ON June 24, 2009, the Government of India issued guidelines pertaining to Mineral Concession proposals to be considered by State Governments, and inter alia directed the State Governments to process the applications as per para 8.8 of the Guidelines, which paragraph reads as under: