CHOKSEY CHEMICALS PVT LTD Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY GOVERNMENT OF A P HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-company was granted a mining lease covered by a mining lease deed dated 30-9-1969 in respect of land admeasuring Acres 200-00 in Survey No. 22/B (p) of Konuppalapadu village, Yadiki Mandal, Anantapur District fo r mining lime stone for a period of 20 years. At that time the name of the petitioner-company was M/s. Mineral Mining Company Private Limited and the said name was changed to the present one i.e., Choksey Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., in the year 1985. According to the petitioner he applied for renewal of the lease for a further period of 20 years by an application dated 27-9-1988 made to the Government of Andhra Pradesh through the 2nd respondent, the Director of Mines and Geology, Government of Andhra Pradesh after paying the requisite fee of Rs. 500/- on 14-9-1988. The said application was rejected by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in its Memo No. 2152/M. III/89-1 dated 11-1-90 and the present Writ Petition is preferred by the petitioner for quashing the said Memo as illegal and against law and for directing the 1st respondent i.e. the Secretary to Government, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Andhra Pradesh to renew the said lease deed.

(2.) A reading of the impugned Memo dated 11-1-1990 discloses the the said renewal application of the petitioner was rejected on 3 ground Firstly, on the ground that the said application was belated. According to the Government, the application for renewal of the petitioner dated 27-9-1988 was received in the Office of the 2nd respondent on 7-10-1988 whereas it ought to have been made before 29-9-1988 i.e., one year before the expiry of the lease; Secondly, on the ground that the change of name of the petitioner-company from Mineral Mining Company Pvt Ltd. to M/s. Choksey Chemicals (P) Ltd., was not informed to the Government as per Rule 62 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). And thirdly, on the ground that the Government already issued orders lapsing the said mining lease with effect from 9-2-1988 under Rule 28 (I) of the Rules for non-working of the mine since execution of the lease deed dated 30-9-1969.

(3.) The petitioner contends that the first ground for rejection of its application for renewal is without any basis. It relies on the covenants of the State Government in the lease deed dated 30-9-1969. Part VIII of the said lease deed bears the heading "the covenants of the State Government". Clause 3 in the said Part VIII is as follows :-