Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s R.K. Industries, a proprietary concern, was granted a mining lease (ML No.1228) for quartz mineral on 22nd February 1975 under the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. On 27th January 1993, the State of Karnataka cancelled the lease on the ground of non-payment of dues. The petitioner challenged this cancellation in Writ Petition No.31821 of 1993, and on 6th September 1993, an interim order was passed staying the operation of the cancellation order and prohibiting the respondents from awarding a mining lease over the same land. The writ petition was subsequently disposed of. The petitioner later filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, seeking a direction to treat the mining lease as deemed to have been granted for a period of 50 years under Section 8A(3) of the Act, as amended by Act No.10/2015. The respondents opposed the petition. The Court examined the facts and noted that the lease was granted for a period of 20 years, which expired in 1995. The cancellation order of 1993 was stayed by an interim order, but the Court held that the interim order did not revive the lease; it only prevented the respondents from taking further action based on the cancellation. Since the lease had already expired by efflux of time before the amendment came into force on 12th January 2015, the petitioner could not claim the benefit of deemed extension under Section 8A(3). The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner failed to establish that the lease was in force on the date of the amendment.
Headnote
A) Mines and Minerals - Mining Lease - Deemed Extension - Section 8A(3) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 - The petitioner sought a declaration that its mining lease granted on 22.02.1975 is deemed to have been granted for 50 years under Section 8A(3) as amended by Act No.10/2015. The Court held that the lease was cancelled on 27.01.1993 and the interim order dated 06.09.1993 only stayed the cancellation but did not revive the lease. Since the lease was not in force on the date of the amendment (12.01.2015), the benefit of deemed extension under Section 8A(3) is not available. The writ petition was dismissed. (Paras 2-5)
B) Mines and Minerals - Interim Order - Effect on Lease - Section 8A(3) of MMDR Act, 1957 - The Court clarified that an interim order staying cancellation does not revive the lease; it only maintains status quo. The lease period had already expired by efflux of time (20 years from 1975) before the amendment. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim deemed extension. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner's mining lease (ML No.1228) granted on 22.02.1975 is deemed to have been extended for a period of 50 years under Section 8A(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 as amended by Act No.10/2015.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner's mining lease was not in force on the date of the amendment (12.01.2015) and therefore the benefit of deemed extension under Section 8A(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 is not available.
Law Points
- Deemed extension of mining lease
- Section 8A(3) of MMDR Act
- 1957
- Amendment Act 10/2015
- Lease cancellation
- Interim order effect
- Lease period computation
Case Details
2021 LawText (KAR) (06) 33
Writ Petition No.5765 of 2020 (GM-MM-S)
Abhay S. Oka, Chief Justice, Suraj Govindaraj, Justice
Smt. Kusuma R Prasad for Sri L.M. Chidanandayya (for petitioner), Sri S.S. Mahendra, AGA (for respondents)
State of Karnataka, Director of Mines & Geology, Deputy Director of Mines & Geology
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking a direction to treat the mining lease as deemed to have been granted for 50 years under Section 8A(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to treat ML No.1228 as deemed to have been granted for a period of 50 years under Section 8A(3) as amended by Act No.10/2015.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's mining lease was cancelled in 1993, and despite an interim stay, the lease period expired. The petitioner claimed that under the amended Section 8A(3), the lease should be deemed to have been granted for 50 years.
Previous Decisions
The mining lease was granted on 22.02.1975. On 27.01.1993, the lease was cancelled by the State. The petitioner challenged the cancellation in Writ Petition No.31821 of 1993, and an interim order was passed on 06.09.1993 staying the cancellation. The writ petition was later disposed of.
Issues
Whether the mining lease granted on 22.02.1975 is deemed to have been extended for 50 years under Section 8A(3) of the MMDR Act, 1957 as amended by Act No.10/2015.
Whether the interim order dated 06.09.1993 staying the cancellation order revived the lease or kept it in force.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the mining lease should be treated as deemed to have been granted for 50 years under Section 8A(3) of the MMDR Act, 1957 as amended by Act No.10/2015.
Respondents opposed the petition, contending that the lease was cancelled and had expired, and the interim order did not revive it.
Ratio Decidendi
The interim order staying the cancellation of a mining lease does not revive the lease; it only maintains status quo. Since the lease period had already expired by efflux of time before the amendment under Section 8A(3) came into force, the petitioner cannot claim deemed extension of the lease for 50 years.
Judgment Excerpts
On 22nd February 1975 on the basis of an application made by the petitioner under the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, a mining lease was granted to the petitioner for quartz mineral.
An order was passed on 27th January 1993 by the State of Karnataka, by which, the mining lease granted to the petitioner was cancelled on the ground of non payment of dues as mentioned in the said order.
On 6th September 1993, an interim order was passed in the said writ petition staying the operation of the order dated 27th January 1993 and prohibiting the respondent from awarding mining lease in respect of the land subject matter of the lease granted to the petitioner.
The lease was granted for a period of 20 years. The lease period expired in 1995. The interim order passed in the earlier writ petition did not have the effect of reviving the lease. The lease was not in force on the date of the amendment.
Procedural History
The mining lease was granted on 22.02.1975. On 27.01.1993, the lease was cancelled by the State. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.31821 of 1993 challenging the cancellation, and on 06.09.1993, an interim order was passed staying the cancellation. The writ petition was disposed of. Subsequently, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition No.5765 of 2020 seeking a declaration that the lease is deemed to have been granted for 50 years under Section 8A(3) of the MMDR Act, 1957 as amended by Act No.10/2015. The High Court dismissed the petition on 30.06.2021.
Acts & Sections
- Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957: Section 8A(3)
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
