Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s Aane Mines and Minerals, a partnership firm, applied for a mining lease for iron ore and manganese on 1st August 2006 under Rule 22(1) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. After submitting a mining plan and obtaining clearance from the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, the State of Karnataka sanctioned a mining lease over an area of 10.24 acres in Sy.No.12/P2, 19/15, 14/1B1 of Dindadahalli Village by order dated 19th June 2010. Subsequently, the Central Government enacted Act No.10 of 2015 amending the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, which came into force on 12th January 2015. On 6th January 2017, the State Government passed an order granting a mining lease to the petitioner over a reduced area of 2.47 hectares (approximately 6.2 acres), applying the amended provisions. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the order dated 06.01.2017 and a direction to execute the lease deed as per the original grant order dated 09.06.2010 and to cause statutory extension of the lease period under Section 8A(3) of the Act. The court heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. By consent, the matter was taken up for final disposal. The court observed that the State Government had reduced the lease area without following the procedure under Section 8A(3) of the Act and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The court held that the reduction of the lease area was unsustainable and quashed the impugned order dated 06.01.2017. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's application afresh in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
Headnote
A) Mining Law - Grant of Mining Lease - Reduction of Lease Area - Section 8A(3) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - The petitioner applied for mining lease over 10.24 acres, which was sanctioned by the State Government on 19.06.2010. Subsequently, the State Government passed an order on 06.01.2017 granting lease over only 2.47 hectares (approx 6.2 acres) without following the procedure under Section 8A(3) and without hearing the petitioner. The court held that the reduction of area without statutory compliance and natural justice was unsustainable. (Paras 2-5) B) Mining Law - Application of Amended Provisions - Section 8A(3) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - The State Government applied the amended provisions of the Act of 1957 (by Act 10 of 2015) to reduce the lease area. The court held that the reduction could only be done in accordance with Section 8A(3) which requires a proper procedure and hearing. The impugned order dated 06.01.2017 was quashed. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government could reduce the area of a mining lease granted earlier without following the procedure under Section 8A(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned Government Order dated 06.01.2017 (Annexure-J) is quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's application afresh in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Law Points
- Mining lease grant
- Reduction of lease area
- Section 8A(3) Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act
- 1957
- Rule 22(1) Mineral Concession Rules
- 1960
- Natural justice
- Legitimate expectation
