SHYAMBABU GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the respondent No. 1, dated 14-8-1980 passed in exercise of revisional jurisdiction by which a mining lease granted in favour of the petitioner has been set aside.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he had applied for a quarry lease for extracting limestone as a minor mineral to be used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material, on land forming part of Khasra Nos. 24 and 25/3 measuring 0.878 hectares in village Bis-tara, Patwari Circle No. 53, tahsil Murwara, district Jabalpur. This application was submitted under M. P. Minor Mineral Rules, 19-61. This application of the petitioner was sanctioned for a period of 5 years without any renewal clause by an order dated 22-12-1978 and consequent to this order, a lease-deed was executed in his favour on 18-1-1979 and the petitioner after performing the necessary formalities obtained possession of the area and started extraction of limestone.

(3.) The respondent No. 3, M/s. M. P. Lime Works, submitted an application for mining lease over an area of 2.798 hectares of land for extracting limestone and dolomite situated in village Bistara of Jabalpur district, M. P. This application was made to the State Government. It is alleged that no material was placed before the State Government along with the application to show that limestone found in this area was fit to be used as a major mineral. The area for which this application was made by the respondent also included the area which was leased out to the petitioner for extraction of minor mineral. According to the petitioner, the application of the petitioner was granted as the Collector considered this application and granted it as he thought that it was a fit case for grant of lease for minor mineral. The State Government by its order dated 3-2-1979 rejected the application of the respondent No. 3 and it was rejected on three grounds one of which was that for part of this area a lease had already been granted in favour of the petitioner.