LEO MINERALS Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A mining lease near village Baroli, Tehsil- Jhadol, Distt. Udaipur was granted to the petitioner on 06.04.1970, in respect of Asbestos, a major mineral, for a period of twenty years. The petitioner submitted an application for renewal of the mining lease, which came to be rejected by the Government of Rajasthan by an order dated 16.07.1993, on the count that no approval as required under Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 was received from Central Government. In fact Government of India by an order dated 09.07.1986 rejected the proposal for renewal, being found Asbestos mining hazardous to human life. Aggrieved by the same the instant petition for writ is preferred by the petitioner.

(2.) It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that in view of the Rule 26 of The Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 no application for renewal could be refused without affording an opportunity of hearing and for reasons to be recorded in writing. The Rule 26 referred above reads as under:

(3.) The another contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that Asbestos mining can not be unilaterally treated hazardous and ordered to be closed. The question as to whether Asbestos mining is hazardous to human life or not is required to be decided by the experts and not by this Court while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner is having any grievance with regard to decision of the Government of India he should approach to the competent authorities of the Government.