* THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY AND * THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU + W.A. No.621 of 2004 & Batch % Dated 08-02-2005 # Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. … Appellant Vs. $ M/s. RLP Granite Private Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mr.A. Aja Babu, & Others … Respondents ! Counsel for the Appellants in W.As.621 to 625 of 2004 and for Respondent No.2 in W.As.696 to 698, 727 & 730 of 2004 : Sri T. Anantha Babu, Senior Counsel ^ Counsel for Respondent No.1 in all W.As.: Mr. S. RAVI ^ Counsel for Respondents 2 to 4 in W.As. 621 to 625 of 2004 and for the appellants in W.As.696 to 698, 727 & 730 of 2004 : The Advocate General. < GIST: > HEAD NOTE: ? Cases referred (1997)4 SCC 559 2 2003(6) ALD 463 (DB) 3 (1995) 2 SCC 402 4 (1980) 2 SCC 437 : AIR 1980 SC 1037 : 1980(1) SCR 1170 C/15 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY And THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.A. Nos.621, 622, 623, 624, 625, 696, 697, 698, 727 & 730 of 2004 Writ Appeal No.621 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order, dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20085 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .. APPELLANT AND 1. M/s. RLP Granite Private Limited, a Private Limited Co., having its Registered Office at 6-3-802, 1st Floor, Zainab Commercial Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad-16, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mr.A. Aja Babu, S/o.Sri.M.Koti Reddy, aged about 58 years. 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3. The Director of Mines and Geology, Burugularamakrsihna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ... RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.622 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20086 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1. M/s. Ongole Mineral Exports Private Limited, a Private Limited Company, having its Registered Office at 6-3-802, 1st Floor, Zainab Commercial Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad-16, Represented by its Managing Director, Mr.K.Raghava Reddy, S/o.Sri K.Ramachandra Reddy, aged about 48 years. 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ... RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.623 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20087 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 M/s. Margasree Granitres Private Limited, a Private Limited Company, having its Registered Office at 8-418, Sunder Nagar, Mangamoor Donka, Ongole, Represented by its Managing Director, Mr.S. Venkateshwar Rao, S/o. Sri S.Venkat Rao, aged about 45 years. 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. .. Respondents WRIT APPEAL No.624 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20084 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1. M/s. Arham Mineral Exports Private Limited, a Private Limited Company having its Registered Office at 3-6-157, Victory Vihar Apartments, Flat No.103, Urdu Lane, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad, Represented by its Managing Director, Mr.Mohd.Ishack, S/o.Late Sri K.Vazir, aged about 42 years. 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 4 The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ... RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.625 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20083 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1. M/s. Isra Mineral Exports Private Limited, a Private Limited Company, having its Registered Office at 3-6-157, Victory Vihar Apartments, Flat No.103, Urdu Lane, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad, Represented by its Managing Director, Mr. Mohd. Ishack, S/o.Late Sri.K.Vazir, aged about 42 years. 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.696 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20087 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce (Mines) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Director of Mines & Geology, Government of A.P., B.R.K.R. Bhavan, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 3. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 M/s. Margasree Granites Pvt. Ltd., a Private Limited Co., having its Regd. Office at Sunder Nagar, Mangamnoor Donka, Ongole, Prakasam District, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mr. S. Venakteshwar Rao S/o. Sri S. Venkat Rao, aged abut 45 years. 2 Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. ..... RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.697 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20086 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Dept. Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 3. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. M/s. Ongole Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd., a Private Limited Co., having its Regd. Office having its registered office at 6-3-802, 1st floor, Zainab Commercial Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director Mr. K. Ragahava Reddy S/o. Sri K. Ramchandra Reddy, aged about 48 years. 2. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.698 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20085 of 2003 in on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. The Government of A.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce (Mines) Dept., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2. The Director of Mines & Geology, Government of A.P., BRKR Buildings, Hyderabad. 3. The Asst. Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. M/s. RLP Granites Pvt. Ltd., a Private Limited co., having its Regd. Office at Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director Mr. M. Aja Babu S/o. Sri M. Koti Reddy, aged about 58 years. 2. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corpn., Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.727 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20083 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderaba d. 3. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. M/s. Isra Mineral Exports Private Limited, a Private Limited Company having its Registered Office at 3-6-157, Victory Vihar Apartments, Flat No. 103, Urdu Lane, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mr. Mohd. Ishack S/o late Sri K.Vazir, aged about 42 years. 2. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS WRIT APPEAL No.730 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12- 03-2004 in W.P. No.20084 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Director of Mines & Geology, Burugularamakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 3. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, Prakasam District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. M/s. Arham Mineral Exports Private Limited, a Private Limited Company having its Registered Office at 3-6-157, Victory Vihar Apartments, Flat No.103, Urdu Lane, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad, Represented by its Managing Director, Mr.Mohd.Ishack, S/o.Late Sri K.Vazir, aged about 42 years. 2. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Pancom Business Centre, Ameerpet, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants in W.As.621 to 625 of 2004 and for Respondent No.2 in W.As.696 to 698, 727 & 730 of 2004 : Sri T. Anantha Babu, Senior Counsel Counsel for Respondent No.1 in all W.As.: Mr. S. RAVI Counsel for Respondents 2 to 4 in W.As.621 to 625 of 2004 and for the appellants in W.As.696 to 698, 727 & 730 of 2004 : The Advocate General. The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.A. Nos.621, 622, 623, 624, 625, 696, 697, 698, 727 & 730 of 2004 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Sudershan Reddy) This batch of Writ Appeals are required to be disposed of by a common judgment since they arise out of the common order made in W.P. Nos.20083, 20084, 20085, 20086 & 20087 of 2003, dated 12-03-2004, by a learned single Judge of this Court. Learned single Judge allowed the writ petitions filed by the respondents/writ petitioners and accordingly set aside the impugned orders passed by the Director of Mines and Geology in Proceedings Nos.15721/R3(2)/2003, 15718/R3(2)/2003, 15720/R3(2)/2003, 15722/R3(2)/2003, 15719/R3(2)/2003, dated 16-06-2003, as confirmed by the State Government in Memo Nos.11312/M.II(1)/2003-5, 11311/M.II(1)/2003-5, 11309/M.II(1)/2003-5, 11310/M.II(1)/2003-5, 11308/M.II(1)/ 2003-5, dated 15-09-2003, respectively. The only question that falls for our consideration is whether the proceedings of the Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad, dated 16-06- 2003, cancelling the quarry lease granted in favour of the writ petitioners and its confirmation by the State Government suffer from any legal infirmities? For the sake of convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed in the writ petitions. FACTUAL MATRIX: In order to consider the question as to whether the impugned order cancelling the quarry lease suffers from any illegality, it is just and necessary to notice the facts leading to filing of this batch of writ petitions. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, having found reserves of Black Granite Mineral in the land admeasuring Acs.268-70 cents of Ramatheertham village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District, accorded permission for shifting of the existing Cattle Breeding Farm therein to Chadalavada village, Naguluppalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, into the lands owned by the Endowments Department subject to certain terms and conditions stipulated in G.O. Ms. No.23, dated 22-02-1999, so as to enable the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Limited (for short “the Corporation”), a fully owned undertaking of the State Government to undertake quarry operations of Black Granite Mineral available therein. The Corporation is engaged in the activity of prudent exploitation of minerals in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The State Government further vide its G.O. Ms. No.550, Revenue (Assn.II) Department, dated 12-09-2002, accorded permission to the Collector, Prakasam District, to transfer the land admeasuring Acs.268-70 cents belonging to Animal Husbandry Department in favour of the Corporation, in lieu of the Endowment land through negotiations treating the transfer of land as a special case. The Corporation has applied for grant of quarry lease but subsequently given its consent for converting the same into an application for grant of prospecting licence for black granite mineral. The State Government vide G.O. Ms. No.11, dated 05-01-2000, granted prospecting licence for a period of two years in favour of the Corporation in accordance with the provisions of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short “the Act”) and the Rules thereunder over an extent of Acs.70-70 cents in various survey numbers. The State Government vide its proceedings, dated 05-08-2000, granted prospecting licence for black granite for a period of two years in favour of the Corporation under the provisions of the Act and the Rules thereunder over an extent of Acs.89-06 cents in Survey Nos.52, 55/3, 3C and 55/4A of R.L. Puram Village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District. Be it noted, the Corporation since purchased the land for a valuable consideration became the owner of the land and thus acquired surface rights even before the grant of prospecting licence. That the Corporation is the true and absolute owner of the land in question is not in dispute, and therefore, no further details in this regard are required to be noted. The Corporation, keeping in view, the policy of the State Government for development of mineral industry with private participation, issued tender notifications on 09-08-2000 and 04-01-2001 inviting tenders from the persons having minimum qualifying criteria for prospecting and quarrying galaxy granite in certain parts of the land. As per the tender conditions, the auctioned amount or the amount quoted in the sealed tender for Mining Franchise Fee (MFF) per cubic meter whichever is higher to be considered as the highest bid. The Corporation finalised the tenders in favour of M/s. Alif Granite Private Limited who formed two joint venture companies i.e. M/s. Arham Mineral Exports Private Limited for Block No.X and M/s. Isra Mineral Exports Private Limited (Petitioners in W.P. Nos.20084 & 20084 of 2003 respectively) for Block – III for prospecting and quarrying black galaxy granite. The joint venture companies entered into two separate Mining Franchise Fee agreements (for short ‘MFF agreement’) with the Corporation. Likewise, the Corporation finalised the tender in favour of one M/s. Krishna Sai Granites and M/s. Harikrishna Sai Granites who formed joint venture company in the name of M/s. Margasree Granite Private Limited (Petitioner in W.P. No.20087 of 2003) and also entered into a separate MFF agreement with the Corporation. The Corporation also finalsied the tenders in favour of M/s. Midwest Granite Private Limited who formed two joint venture companies i.e. M/s. RLP Granite Private Limited for Block – VII, and M/s. Ongole Mineral Exports Private Limited (Petitioners in W.P. No.20085 & 20086 of 2003 respectively ) for Block – VIII for prospecting and quarrying galaxy granite. Thereafter, the Corporation applied for transfer of their prospecting licences in favour of the joint venture companies and the Director of Mines and Geology accordingly transferred the prospecting licence held by the Corporation in favour of the joint venture companies for the unexpired portion of the licence fee. That within short span of time, after transfer of the prospecting licence by the Corporation in favour of the joint venture companies, some disputes were raised by the promoters of the joint venture companies challenging a part of Project Cooperation and Investment Agreement (for short ‘PCI agreement) and MFF agreement with regard to payment of fee. The writ petitions filed by M/s. RLP Granite Private Limited and M/s. Ongole Mineral Exports Private Limited were dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment, dated 09-09-2002, upholding the legality and the validity of collection of mineral franchise fee. That according to the Corporation, M/s. RLP Granite Private Limited and M/s. Ongole Mineral Exports Private Limited (Writ Petitioners) have totally stopped quarry operations since 09-09-2002. M/s. Isra Mineral Exports Private Limited stopped operations from 01-02-2002 whereas M/s. Arham Mineral Exports Private Limited stopped operations from 19-03-2003 and M/s. Margasree Granite Private Limited stopped operations from 01-01-2002. The judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court is the subject matter of S.L.Ps. pending in the Supreme Court where the operation of the judgment has not been stayed. The Supreme Court declined to grant any stay vide its order, dated 02-12-2002. That according to the Corporation, certain amounts were payable by the petitioners to the Corporation in the following manner:- 1. M/s. Arham Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd. -Rs. 73.50 lakhs 2. M/s. Isra Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd. -Rs. 35.35 lakhs 3. M/s. Margasree Granite Pvt. Ltd. -Rs.101.50 lakhs 4. M/s. RLP Granite Private Limited -Rs. 89.80 lakhs 5. M/s. Ongole Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd. -Rs. 89.80 lakhs The Corporation issued separate show cause notices through its letters, dated 25-02-2003, calling upon the petitioners to pay the outstanding amounts due and payable by them within 15 days from the date of receipt of the letters. The Corporation in clear and categorical terms put the petitioners on notice that it would be constrained to invoke Clause 8.1 of MFF agreement and Clause 11.1(e) and 14.1(e) of PCI agreement and terminate the said agreements duly forfeiting the security deposit paid by the investor company under the agreements and restrain them from entering into the mining area. The petitioners filed application on 04-03-2003 before the Supreme Court seeking stay of operation of the show cause notices, which was not granted. Accordingly, the Corporation vide its letter, dated 17-03-2003, terminated the PCI and MFF agreements and restrained the petitioners from entering into the leased area and requested them to stop quarrying operations forthwith. Further, the Corporation reserved its right to avail such appropriate legal remedies, as may be available to it later, for recovery of the outstanding amounts together with interest including disposal of granite blocks, if any, and adjust sale proceeds against the amounts due and payable by the petitioners. The petitioners were required to retransfer the quarry lease granted by the Director of Mines and Geology, which according to the Corporation was granted purely as a consequential measure to MFF and PCI agreements. In the meanwhile, the Corporation on 26-03-2003 took possession of the leased areas and the blocks lying at the site under a panchanama conducted by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Chimakurthy. Thereafter, the Corporation, vide its letter, dated 16-05-2003, duly informed the Director of Mines and Geology that in view of the withdrawal of surface rights and termination of PCI and MFF agreements, the quarry leases granted to the petitioners have become inoperative and invalid and that they cannot enter upon the Corporation’s lands and carryon quarry operations in any manner. The Director of Mines and Geology pursuant to the information furnished by the Corporation, dated 16-05-2003, issued show cause notices, dated 26-05- 2003, requiring the petitioners to show cause within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice as to why the quarry lease of black granite granted to them should not be cancelled, since the Corporation has withdrawn their consent of surface rights in the interest of mineral development of the State. The petitioners submitted their individual explanations about which there is no dispute. The Director being the competent authority, after an elaborate consideration of the explanations submitted by each of the petitioners, cancelled quarry leases initially granted in favour of the petitioners. The leases have been cancelled mainly on the ground that under the statutory provision “the consent of owner of the land is a condition precedent for grant of lease. This condition should be compulsorily complied with under Rule 12(3A) of A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short ‘the Rules’) read with note under Rule 12(5) of the Rules, the consent of the pattadar is necessary.” The competent authority found that the petitioners are no longer entitled to continuance of quarry lease because the substratum of the grant has ceased to exist. The authority relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Pallava Granites Industrial India (P) Ltd. v Government of A.P.. The petitioners, being aggrieved by the orders of cancellation of the lease granted to them, filed revision before the Government and the Government vide separate proceedings, dated 15-09-2003, dismissed the revision applications. It is that order, which is challenged in this batch of writ petitions by the petitioners. In the meanwhile, the Corporation filed its applications on 17-06-2003 for grant of quarry leases for black granite over an extent of Acs.89-09 cents and Acs.31-09 cents with the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, and the same was granted by the Director vide his proceedings, dated 19-06-2003, since no other applicant possessed surface rights for the lands in respect of which applications have been submitted seeking grant of quarry lease. The Corporation on 20-06-2003 executed lease deeds after payment of Rs.43.00 lakhs to the State Government towards advance dead rent and security deposit etc. Thereafter, the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Ongole, issued work order on 20-06-2003 to the Corporation permitting it to commence the quarry operations with effect from 20-06-2003. The learned single Judge by a common judgment, dated 12-03-2004, allowed all the writ petitions and accordingly set aside the order of cancellation of quarry lease. Learned single Judge took the view that under the provisions of the Rules framed under the Act, the Director of Mines and Geology is empowered under Rule 12 of the said Rules to determine/cancel leases only in cases where lessee violates conditions of grant or covenants of the lease deed and on no other ground. The learned single Judge found that the petitioners did not violate any of the conditions of grant or covenants of the lease deeds, and therefore, no proceedings as against them could have been issued for cancellation of the lease deeds. That as per the terms of the quarry lease and conditions of grant, payment of franchise fee is not a condition; therefore, the information furnished by the Corporation regarding termination of the agreements entered by them with the petitioners cannot be a valid ground for cancellation of quarry lease. The learned Judge further held that once a quarry lease is granted, even with regard to patta lands, “on the consent given by the pattadar/owner, it would not depend on continuance of such consent of pattadar/owner”. The learned single Judge, accordingly, held that there is no such requirement of continuous consent under the Rules. In such view of the matter, withdrawal of consent by the Corporation, consequent upon termination of PCI & MFF agreements is not a valid ground for cancellation of leases; the consent of the owners of the land is required for disposing of the applications for grant of quarry lease in case of minor minerals but once it is granted, the continuance of lease will not depend upon the sweet will of the landowner. SUBMISSIONS: The learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, and Sri T. Anantha Babu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Corporation, submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to grant of any relief, since they have been lawfully evicted from the land by the Corporation, which is admittedly the owner of the surface rights of the land, in accordance with PCI and MFF agreements entered into between the Corporation and the petitioners. The petitioners have lost the possession of the land, which is significant. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that PCI and MFF agreements entered into between the Corporation and the petitioners based on which the prospecting licences have been transferred and the grant of quarry leases in favour of the petitioners based on the very same agreements are so integrally intertwined and cannot be separated into watertight compartments. Cancellation of PCI and MFF agreements automatically results in withdrawal of the consent, which is one of the requirements not only for grant but also for subsistence and continuance of a quarry lease under the provisions of the Rules. In the instant case, since possession has been taken over by the Corporation, the