SRI LILA KANTA BORA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that surviving defects have already been removed.

(2.) Petitioner was granted mining lease of Iron Ore over an area of 233.99 Hectare in Karampada Reserve Forest in West Singhbhum district with effect from 10.07.1972 for a period of 30 years (Annexure-1). Twelve month before expiry of the period of lease, it applied for first renewal on 08.07.2001 in terms of Rule 24(A) (1) of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, which however, remained pending till Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 was enacted. The Ordinance had come into force with effect from 12.01.2015 before the Amendment Act was passed by the Parliament. Prior to that, on 18.07.2014, Rules 24A(6) of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 was amended which provided for deemed extension for a period of two years with effect from 18.07.2014 of such cases pending for first renewal of lease deed where renewal application had been made within time. Petitioner's application for renewal of lease has been rejected by Annexure-19 order dated 01.04.2016 contained in Memo No. 882 passed by the Department of Industries, Mines & Geology, Government of Jharkhand. Consequent thereto, petitioner has been asked to hand over possession of the lease area to Mines Department by letter no. 445 dated 05.04.2016 (Annexure-20) issued by the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, failing which steps would be taken to take possession of the lease hold property by the State Authorities.

(3.) In the background of these relevant facts, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Amarendra Sharan submits that the impugned order rejecting the application of the petitioner for renewal of lease, is bad in law on the following counts: