R YADAIAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this batch of writ petitions the common prayer with a certain change of emphasis is for the issue of a writ directing the respondents not to auction the lease hold rights of sand quarries but to renew the petitioners' sand quarrying leases and to pass such other order as this court may deem fit in the circumstances of each case.

(2.) The central point thus arising for consideration in all the cases is the question whether the lease-hold rights of sand quarries can be put to public auction and secondly whether such leases can be renewed in favour of the petitioners who are the lesees of such sand quarries. There are some minor variations in the prayers in various writ petitions which would be referred to the extent it is necessary. But the approach to the common question can be made in the light of the main relief which is claimed in all the writ petitions.

(3.) For the purpose of a brief appreciation of the rival contentions, the facts in writ Petition No. 11223/89 may be considered. The petitioner in this writ petition submits that by virtue of the powers conferred under Rule 9-B of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, the 2nd respondent conducted auction of sand quarry lease during May, 1988, in Bommala Ramavaram Mandal in Nalgonda District. The petitioner was the highest bidder in the auction conducted on 11-5-1988 and the bid was knocked down in his favour. He paid the full amount and the sale was confirmed by the Joint Collector of Mines and Geology in proceedings No. 1345/M37, dated 1-7-1988 and an agreement was executed on 1-7-1988 specifying the period of lease as being one year from the date of execution of lease-d eed and the lease expired on 30-6-1989. The further contention raised by the petitioner is that the lease once granted is renewable twice as per condition (xiv) of Rule 31 of the A.P. Minior Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. The petitioner has submitted an application to the 3rd respondent to renew his quarry lease in respect of sand quarries in Bommala Ramavaram mandal as per his application dated 1-3-1989 expressing his willingness to pay the dead rent, etc., for the next year on renewal of the lease in accordance with the Rules. He filed another application for extension of lease for the year 1988-89 at least for a period of six months. In W.P. No. 8071/89 filed by the petitioner the respondents were directed to dispose of the applications filed by him for the renewal of the lease. However, the Government has proclaimed auction of the lease hold rights without disposing of the applications for renewal which is challenged in this writ petition. The main plank of the submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the renewals under condition (xiv) of Rule 31 of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1966, are mandatory and once the lease has been given the said Rule comes into play for grant of renewals twice for two consecutive years. In this view of the matter the petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to auction the lease hold rights of sand quarries and to renew the petitioners' sand quarry leases in the concerned area. In order to appreciate the full impact of the submissions thus made by the petitioners in all the writ petitions, it is necessary to examine the various relevant provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the A.P. Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 1966. Under Section 15 of the Act it is provided that the State Government may by notification in the official gazette make Rules for regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases or other mineral concessions in respect of minorminerals and for purposes connected therewith. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Act, the A. P. Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 1966, have been made. Under Rule 9 of the said Rules it is provided that every application for grant or renewal of a quarry lease in respect of a land shall be made in form (B) to the Assistant Director concerned, vide G.O.Ms. No. 147, Industries & Commerce, dated 5-3-1982. Under Rule 9-B which was inserted by an amendment vide G.O.Ms. No. 457 Industries and Commerce, dated 22-8-1986 it is provided that notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 9 the State Government may from time to time notify in the official gazette any area covering sand for granting quarry leases thereof by auction. In Rule 9-B(2) it is provided that for the purpose of notifying the areas under sub-rule (1) the State Government shall consider the potentiality, the quanium of the mineral available and the demand for the mineral in the area which it is likely to fetch higher revenues for the Government than the Seigniorage fee or dead rent charged under Rule 10. Under Rule 9-C notice of auction is to be given. With regard to the area notified under sub-rule (1) which is to be leased by auction, Rule 9-D provides for the bid amount ; Rule 9-E deals with the question of acceptance of the bid ; Rule 9-F states that the Director of Mines & Geology shall nominate the officer for conducting the auction and the procedure to be followed by him ; and Rule 9-G is with regard to the deposit of sale amount. These are the relevant Rules which fall for consideration in these cases. But it must be stated here itself that these Rules have undergone amendments from time to time which require careful consideration. The state of the law which stands for the present will thus have to be viewed in the light of the amendments which have been made to the Rules concerning the grant of sand quarry leases by auction. 3. As stated earlier, Rules 9-B (1) and (2) were inserted by G.OMs. No. 457, Industries And Commerce, dated 22-8-1986 which are as under :