PACIFIC EXPORTS, KATNI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant petition invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenge has been made to the orders dated 26-10-2007, 02-01-2008 and 02-01-2017 passed by the respondents No.1 and 2 (Annexure-P/2, Annexure- P/3, Annexure-P/11 and Annexure-P/12) for issuance of directions to the respondents in the nature of mandamus to grant Prospecting Licence in favour of the petitioner for the area admeasuring 35.20 Hectare comprising of Khasra Nos.668/1 and 668/5 situated in the Village, Ghugharikala, Tehsil Sihora, District Jabalpur.

(2.) The petitioner's case in a nutshell is that the petitioner is a firm engaged in the business of mining and minerals. It is stated that the respondent Nos.5 and 6 had applied for grant of mining lease over Khasra No.668/1 (old Khasra No.407/1) admeasuring 59.868 hectare which was considered by the respondent No.2 and it was decided to grant mining lease in respect of the area admeasuring 30.756 hectare in favour of the respondent No.5 and area admeasuring 23.491 hectare in favour of the respondent No.6. The State Government thereafter sought approval from the Central Government by virtue of Section 5(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"]. The Central Government conveyed its approval for grant of mining lease, vide order dated 26-10-2007 and 02-01-2008, however, the issue of grant of mining lease in favour of the respondents No.5 and 6 was not processed further.

(3.) It is argued that the petitioner was granted Reconnaissance Permit in respect of major minerals viz. Titanium, Arsenic, Antimony, Bismuth, Cobalt, Molybdenum, Gold, Silver, Pyrite, Platinum, Pallidum and other associated minerals over an area of 1080 Sq.Kms. in Katni and Jabalpur districts, for a period of three years after obtaining due approval from the Central Government. The area included Khasra Nos.668/1 and 668/5 of Village, Ghughari, Tehsil Sihora, District Jabalpur. Claiming its preferential right to get Prospecting Licence, the petitioner submitted an application in the light of the provisions envisaged under the Act and the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 [for brevity "the Rules"] over an Area admeasuring 35.20 hectares comprising Khasra Nos.668/1 and 668/5 before the respondent No.1. As the application was not considered the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No.9872/2014 seeking a direction to the respondents to consider and decide his application, which was disposed of by this Court directing the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner. The respondents, thereafter considered the application and rejected the same vide order dated 25-6-2016. The petitioner filed a revision petition against the said order under the provisions of Section 30 of the Act read with Rule 54 of the Rules, which is still pending. In the meanwhile, the respondent No.2 has issued the impugned orders granting mining lease in favour of the respondents No.5 and 6.