IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Writ Jurisdiction)
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024
GRANDS MINING (A Partnership Firm), having its office at GE/16, City
-
Centre, Sector 4, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. and P.S. Bokaro, District Bokaro;
through its Partner Bhupendra Kumar Singh, aged about 49 years, son of
Late Ram Janam Singh, resident of Bhagwati Colony, Jodhadih More, Chas,
P.O. and P.S. Chas, District Bokaro (Jharkhand) ....Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines
and Geology, having its office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S.
Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
2. The Commissioner, Department of Mines and Geology, having its
office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
3. The Director of Mines, Department of Mines and Geology, having its
office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
- -
4. Deputy Commissioner cum District Magistrate, Pakur having its
office at District Collectorate, Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur
(Jharkhand).
5. District Mining Officer, Pakur having its office at District Collectorate,
Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur (Jharkhand).
...Respondents
With
W.P. (C) No. 847 of 2024
GRANDS MINING (A Partnership Firm), having its office at GE/16, City
-
Centre, Sector 4, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. and P.S. Bokaro, District Bokaro,
through its Partner Bhupendra Kumar Singh, aged about 49 years, son of
Late Ram Janam Singh, resident of Bhagwati Colony, Jodhadih More, P.O.
and P.S. Chas, District Bokaro (Jharkhand) ....Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines
and Geology, having its office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S.
Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
2. The Commissioner, Department of Mines and Geology, having its
office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
3. The Director of Mines, Department of Mines and Geology, having its
office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
- -
4. Deputy Commissioner cum District Magistrate, Pakur having its
office at District Collectorate, Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur
(Jharkhand).
5. District Mining Officer, Pakur having its office at District Collectorate,
Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur (Jharkhand).
...Respondents
With
W.P. (C) No. 853 of 2024
GRANDS MINING (A Partnership Firm), having its office at GE/16, City
-
Centre, Sector 4, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. and P.S. Bokaro, District Bokaro,
through its Partner Bhupendra Kumar Singh, aged about 49 years, son of
Late Ram Janam Singh, resident of Bhagwati Colony, Jodhadih More, Chas,
P.O. and P.S. Chas, District Bokaro (Jharkhand) ....Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Mines
and Geology, having its office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S.
Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
2. The Commissioner, Department of Mines and Geology, having its
office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
3. The Director of Mines, Department of Mines and Geology, having its
office at Yojna Bhawan (Nepal House), P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN 834002.
- -
4. Deputy Commissioner cum District Magistrate, Pakur having its
office at District Collectorate, Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur
(Jharkhand).
5. District Mining Officer, Pakur having its office at District Collectorate,
Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur (Jharkhand).
...Respondents
---------------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate
For the State : Mr. M.K. Dubey, AC to AG
-
Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to GA III
---------------
th
30 April 2024
Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.
This batch of writ petitions seeks to challenge the order contained
th
in Memo dated 6 February 2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner
-
declining to execute lease deed on the ground of lack of power and jurisdiction
under the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 as amended by the
2
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
Rules of 2019.
2. This is admitted at the Bar that the facts in these writ petitions and
the point of law formulated therein are identical.
3. For the sake of convenience, we shall reproduce the prayer clause
in WP(C) No. 845 of 2024 hereinbelow:
(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for
-
quashing/setting aside the order passed by Respondent No.4 Deputy
- -
Commissioner cum District Magistrate, Pakur, as contained in Memo No.
- -
208/M, dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure 10), wherein Respondent Deputy
Commissioner, without any due application of mind, has held that it has no
jurisdiction to consider the grant of mining lease in favour of the Petitioner
and, after recording the said fact, has rejected the mining lease application of
the Petitioner pertaining to Stone Boulder at Mauza Golpur, Mouza No. 85,
Plot No. 382/P, Thana Pakuria, District Pakur, having an area of 12.94 Acres
of 5.24 Hectares, in a most illegal and arbitrary manner.
(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including
- - -
Writ of Mandamus, directing, Respondent Deputy Commission cum District
Magistrate, Pakur to grant mining lease in favour of the Petitioner pertaining
to Stone Boulder, situated at Mauza Golpur, Mouza No. 85, Plot No. 382/P,
Thana Pakuria, District Pakur, having an area of 12.94 Acres of 5.24
Hectares; especially because Letter of Intent, contained in Letter No. 99/M
-
dated 19.01.2017 (Annexure 1) has already been issued in favour of the
Petitioner, and, also in view of the fact that Petitioner has already obtained
necessary statutory clearances, including Environmental Clearance, for grant
of mining lease in its favour.
(iii) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/ direction(s) as
Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
case.
-
4. Briefly stated, M/s Grands Mining which is a partnership Firm
constituting Narendra Singh, Bhupendra Kumar Singh and Basant Soren made
nd
an application on 22 December 2016 for the allotment of mining lease and a
th
Letter of Intent (in short, LoI) was issued vide letter no. 99/M dated 19
January 2017 for award of a mining lease spread over 12.94 acres in Plot
No. 382/P under Mouza No. 85 within village Golpur of Pakuria PS in the
district of Pakur. While the final execution of mining lease was pending, Rule
9(1)(e) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 (in short,
nd
JMMC Rules) was amended through a notification dated 22 February 2017 by
the Amendment No. 149 of 2017. In the meantime, the State Level Environment
Impact Assessment Authority, Jharkhand granted Environmental Clearance (in
3
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
-
th
short, EC) for “Golpur Stone Mines Project” on 5 June 2018 to the petitioner
th
Firm. However, the Deputy Commissioner by an order dated 17 September
2019 declined the application for mining lease in view of the amended Rule
9(1)(e) of the JMMC Rules. To challenge the said order, Revision Case No. 88
-
of 2018 was instituted by the petitioner Firm and the revisional Authority noted
-
st
that the petitioner Firm had the Mining Plan approved on 1 June 2017 and it
th th
made application for EC on 14 November 2017 which was duly issued on 5
th
June 2018. The revisional Authority vide order dated 4 January 2022
remanded the matter back to the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur to examine the
matter afresh and pass an order as per the JMMC Rules. On remand by the
Mines Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner made a communication to the
Secretary, Mines and Geology Department seeking guidelines in view of the
th
Gazette Notification dated 8 March 2019 under which the maximum area for
mining lease for stone is restricted to 3 Hectares.
5. Aggrieved by the delay in taking a decision by the Deputy
-
Commissioner, the petitioner Firm approached this Court in WP(C) No. 6043 of
2023 with a prayer for a direction to the Secretary, Department of Mines and
Geology to provide appropriate guidelines to the Deputy Commissioner or in
the alternative to direct the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur to grant mining lease
-
in favour of the petitioner Firm. In the proceeding of WP(C) No. 6043 of 2023,
an undertaking was tendered by the learned State counsel on behalf of the
Deputy Commissioner to the effect that he shall be taking up the matter on
th
merits and would pass an order within next four weeks. The order dated 18
November 2023 passed in WP(C) No. 6043 of 2023 is extracted as under:
“
By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:
(i) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction including Writ
of Mandamus directing Respondent No.1 Secretary, Department of
Mines and Geology, to provide appropriate guidelines to Deputy
Commissioner, Pakur as sought for by the said Officer vide Letter
-
No.282/M dated 23.02.2022 (Annexure 6) for the purpose of grant of
mining lease of Stone Boulders in favour of the Petitioner, for which
Letter of Intent, contained in Letter No. 99/M dated 19.01.2017
-
(Annexure 1) has already been issued to the Petitioner for allotment of
mining lease situated at Mouza Golpur, Mouza No. 85, Plot No. 382(P),
Thana Pakuria, District Pakur, having an area of 12.94 Acres.
4
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
(ii) In alternative to prayer (i) above, Petitioner prays for issuance of
further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Mandamus,
-
directing Respondent Deputy Commissioner, Pakur to grant mining
lease in favour of the Petitioner pertaining to Stone Boulder, situated at
Mouza Golpur, Mouza No. 85, Plot No.385(P), Thana Pakuria, District
Pakur, having an area of 12.94 Acres; especially because Letter of Intent,
-
contained in Letter No. 99/M dated 19.01.2017 (Annexure 1) has
already been issued in favour of the Petitioner, and, also in view of the
fact that Petitioner has already obtained necessary statutory clearances,
including Environmental Clearance, for grant of mining lease in its
favour.”
-
Mr. Chitresh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents State,
would submit that he has received instructions to the effect that the Deputy
Commissioner, Pakur, will take up the matter on merits and dispose of the
same within four weeks.
In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing
the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur (respondent No.4) to consider the case upon
demand by the revisional court as per the directions given therein, within a
period of four weeks hence. Since an undertaking has been given in this case,
-
”
non compliance of the order would invite civil contempt.
-
6. Now taking a leaf from the aforesaid order that non compliance of
-
the writ Court’s order would invite civil contempt, the petitioner Firm laid a
proceeding under the Contempt of Court’s Act, 1971 alleging willful and
intentional violation of this Court’s order.
7. Contempt Case (Civil) No. 1041 of 2023 alongwith other two
contempt cases were dismissed as withdrawn on a statement made by the State
counsel that the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur has taken a decision and passed
th
an order as directed by this Court. In the impugned order dated 6 February
2024, the Deputy Commissioner expressed his opinion that he is not the
competent Authority.
8. In the background of the aforementioned facts, Mr. Sumeet
-
Gadodia, the learned counsel for the petitioner Firm submits that before the
amendments in JMMC Rules when a vested right accrued in favour of the
-
petitioner Firm the Deputy Commissioner was the competent authority and he
shall still be the competent Authority under Rule 9(1)(a). On the other hand,
Mr. M.K. Dubey, the learned State counsel seeks to raise an objection on the
ground that these writ petitions are premature inasmuch as a decision as regards
-
execution of mining lease in favour of the petitioner Firm can be taken by the
Mines Commissioner who is the Authority under Rule 9(1)(a) to conduct
5
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
auction for the mines.
-
nd
9. The petitioner Firm had made an application on 22 December
th
2016 for a mining lease and, in respect thereto, LoI was issued on 19 January
2017. The amendment in Rule 9 of JMMC Rules was brought into effect on
nd
22 February 2017 through the Amendment No. 149 of 2017. Under clause (e)
to Rule 9(1), a mining lease for an area exceeding 5 Hectares can be granted
-
provided the EC was submitted within 180 days of the LoI. The petitioner
Firm’s application was rejected with reference to this amended provision.
10. The relevant portions of the amended JMMC Rules which were
nd
published vide Notification dated 22 February 2017 read as under:
JHARKHAND MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 2004
(as Amended Vide Notification No. 149 dated 22.02.2017 )
-
(iv) Rule 9(1)(a) is substituted as follows:
Mining lease of minor minerals less than 05.00 hectare area of raiyat land of
-
Schedule 2 shall be approved by the Deputy Commissioner.
Provided that the approval of mining lease on area above 05.00 hectare of
minor minerals of raiyat area and mining lease of Batru Mineral, Granite,
Marble, Sandstone and Ornamental Stone will be as per Jharkhand Minor
Mineral Auction Rules (which will be defined and issued separately). Under
the stated provisions, this will be done through electronic auction by the
Director of Mines. But the State Government can also authorize the Deputy
Commissioner for auction as per requirement.
Provided that the approval of mining lease in respect of 31 (thirty one)
minerals notified through Notification No. 1653/M, Ranchi, dated 6
September, 2016, shall be subject to the provisions laid down in the
Jharkhand Minor Mineral Auction Rules (which will be defined and issued
separately). Under this, it will be done through electronic auction by the
Director, Mines.
Provided that in the case of the above 31 (thirty one) minerals and sandstone,
granite, marble and ornamental stone, before the auction, the work of
identifying the block will be done by checking the availability and quality of
the mineral by the Directorate of Geology, Jharkhand or other exploration
establishment authorized by the State Government will be done.
For the protection of community property like pool, road, pond, river,
building, religious place, cremation ground, mountain etc., security zone will
have to be identified as per the rules issued by the State Government and the
standards established by the Forest Environment and Climate Change
Department, in which minerals There will be no mining work.
- -
(v) After Rule 9(1)(c), Rule 9(1)(d), 9(1)(e), 9(1)(f) and 9(1)(g) are inserted
-
as follows :
(d) Before the date of issuance of this notification, applications received for
mining on government area and Raiyat area of more than 05.00 hectares will
automatically be disqualified.
(e) The applications that have been received for government land and Raiyati
6
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
land for more than 05.00 hectare in which Letter of Intent has been issued
under Rule 11 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Grant Rules, 2004 before the date
of issue of this notification, environmental clearance and mining plan will
have to be compulsorily submitted within 180 days from the date of issue of
this notification, otherwise those applications shall be automatically rejected.
(f) Those mining leases obtained on government area and rayoti area of more
than 05.00 hectare area, which were under renewal and have lapsed due to not
receiving of environmental approval/mining plan, the period of their lease is
from the date of lease approval and renewal to 31st March. The period will be
considered extended till 2020, provided that no order for
rejection/cancellation/expiration of the mining lease has been passed before
the date of notification, but no mining can be done on such mining lease until
environmental clearance required for mining is obtained.
(g) The period of sanctioned/renewed mining lease on government area and
Raiyat area of more than 5.00 hectare area, if approved and, if the renewal
period is after March 31, 2020, then their period will remain valid till the
period of their acceptance/renewal.
11. However, before the order of remand was passed by the Mines
Commissioner, there was another amendment in Rule 9 to the effect that the
mining lease for 3 Hectares or more shall be granted through auction. The
amended Rules provided as under:
JHARKHAND MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 2004
(as Amended Vide Notification No. 218 dated 08.03.2019)
4. Rules 9(1)(a), 9(1)(b) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004
as amended in 2017 are replaced as follows and proviso to 9(1)(f) is added as
follows:
- -
Rule 9(1)(a) Mining lease of stone, morum and clay minor minerals on 03.00
hectare area of raiyat land and less area will be approved by the Deputy
Commissioner.
Provided that except the areas and minerals mentioned in the proviso to Rule
6(b) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concessional (Amendment) Rules, 2019,
mining lease of all other minor minerals except sand will be sanctioned in
terms of the provisions of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Auction Rules, 2017,
through electronic auction to be conducted by the Director of Mines.
However, the State Government can also authorize the Deputy Commissioner
for auction as and when required.
Provided that in the case of 31 (thirty one) minerals notified vide Notification
No. 1653/M, Ranchi, dated September 06, 2016, availability and quality of
minerals before auction of mineral like granite stone mineral, marble,
sandstone and ornamental stone etc. would be done. The work of identifying
the block after investigation will be done by the Geology Directorate,
Jharkhand or other exploration establishment authorized by the state
government.
For the safety of community property such as bridges, roads, ponds, rivers,
buildings, religious places, cremation grounds, mountains etc., security zones
will have to be marked as per the rules issued by the State Government and
the parameters established by the Forest Environment and Climate Change
Department, where there will be no mining of minerals.
7
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
- -
Rule 9(1)(b) Approval of prospecting license and mining leases for granite
mineral will be done by the State Government through electronic auction
under the provisions of Jharkhand State Minor Mineral Rules.
Provided that prospecting license, acceptance of mining lease and
conservation and development of granite mineral will be in accordance with
the provisions of The Granite Conservation and Development Rules, 1999.
- -
Rule 9(1)(f): Provided that in case of extension/renewal of the
pending/expired mining lease of granite mineral, the minimum period of the
mining lease will be in accordance with the provisions of The Granite
Conservation and Development Rules, 1999.
Provided that all pending cases for granite mineral will have to be
extended/renewed within 06 months from the date of notification, provided
all statutory clearances/approvals have been obtained by such applicants.
-
12. On behalf of the petitioner Firm, it is contended that the rights of a
litigant concretise on the date of seeking relief and an adjudication thereon
should be made on the basis of the law existing on that day. In “Beg Raj Singh
v. State of U.P. & Ors.” (2003) 1 SCC 726, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
observed that the ordinary rule of litigation is that the rights of the parties stand
crystalised on the date of commencement of litigation and the right to relief
should be decided by reference to the date on which the petitioner entered the
province of the Court. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, the learned counsel for the
-
petitioner Firm submits that the revisional Authority condoned the delay in
-
submission of the EC and as of that date, the petitioner Firm was eligible and
fulfilled all necessary conditions for grant of subject mining leases.
13. In “Beg Raj Singh”, the Hon’ble Supreme Court contemplated two
situations whereunder relief may be declined to the aggrieved party. First, there
may be a situation where on account of subsequent or intervening events the
aggrieved party may be denied relief in equity. Secondly, the relief to which the
aggrieved party was entitled may have been rendered redundant by lapse of
time or incapable of being granted. In a situation which is presented in this
-
batch of writ petitions, the petitioner Firm may justifiably be declined the relief.
However, the State Government’s action in granting approvals to mining leases
for minor mineral executed even recently cannot be overlooked. For a similar
reason, as to the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner to execute mining
lease beyond 3 Hectares, we may indicate that the State Government seems to
have approved the lease deeds executed by the Deputy Commissioners in other
8
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.
districts. We are definitely not criticizing the incumbent Deputy Commissioner,
Pakur and have formed an opinion to entertain these writ petitions only for this
reason that the Departmental Secretary did not put up his stand and the State
Government seems to have approved mining leases exceeding 3 Hectares
executed by the Deputy Commissioners in the recent past. This is also bearing
in our mind that for whatsoever reason the State Government did not put up a
serious challenge in the previous proceedings and almost conceded to the stand
th
taken in the writ petition/contempt petition. Now, in 4 round of litigation, this
-
Court should not re open the whole issue and ignore the previous orders passed
between the parties.
14. Therefore, these writ petitions are allowed.
15. On full and all statutory payments, the Deputy Commissioner shall
execute the subject mining leases within four weeks, upon verification of other
conditions, if any.
(Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.)
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.K./Nishant
N.AFR
9
W.P.(C) No. 845 of 2024 & Ors.