JEHAL PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.

(2.) PETITIONER seeks quashing of an order dated 10.9.2007 contained in Annexure -16, which is a revisional order passed by the Mines Commissioner, Government of Bihar in Revision Case No. 44/2007. He also wants quashing of the order dated 22.5.2007 annexed as Annexure -14 to the writ application, which was the original order of the Collector, Nawada by virtue of which the lease of stone and moram granted in favour of the petitioner had been cancelled. He has also prayed for a direction upon the respondent that the lease granted to him on 7.4.2001 for exercise of power under Rule 22 of theBihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1972(h ereinafter referred to as the Rules) shall remain to be valid for the next ten years. By virtue of a mining lease petitioner was granted right of removal of stone and moram by the competent authority at Nawada for a period of ten years with effect from 1.10.1991 to 30.9.2001. The lease was granted under the provisions of Rule 22 of the Rules. The original lease was to expire on 30.9.2001 and in terms of Rule 22(1) an application for renewal of the same was made before the expiry of the said lease on 3.4.2001. The competent authority i.e. the Collector acted upon the request of the petitioner and on 7.4.2001 itself the lease was renewed for a further period of ten years from 1.10.2001 till 30.9.2011. As a confirmation of the said renewal a communication dated 7.4.2001 was made to the petitioner by the Assistant Mining Officer of Nawada. However, a formal lease deed was executed only on 25.5.2001 and 30.5.2001 between the petitioner and the Collector, Nawada as well as between the petitioner and the Assistant Mining Officer acting on behalf of the State of Bihar.

(3.) PETITIONER 'scontention is that based on the said renewal and execution he has made substantial investments and carried on his activities without any let or hindrance. Some problems, however, was raised by the Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Bihar as would be evident from the communication dated 3.5.2005 contained in Annexure -3. By this communication the Joint Secretary of the Department wanted details of renewal of leases made after the amendment brought about in the Rules on 23.3.2001. The Mines Department was informed by the District Magistrate that the petitioner 'slease was renewed on 7.4.2001 after the Government Notification dated 23.3.2001. It seems matter was examined by the Department of Mines and Geology and the renewals were not viewed as a bonafide exercise in view of the amendments brought about in the various provisions of the Rules specially Rules 9A, 22A and 52. By virtue of such amendments the Government as a matter of policy decision as well as enactment decided that the renewal of leases for quarrying for minor minerals shall be by way of an auction and not by settlement as done earlier. This was a vital departure made by the legislators in the interest of better revenue generation for the State of Bihar. It seems that the renewals made after such amendments made in the Rules caught the attention even of the legislators.