HI$H IGWQT C31: CHI--§AT?15$ARH xH §§LA$t§Ui§ W.?. {if} Na§§73 OF 2G0? PETI?IGN§R Appiicam‘ "U’S R E3?QNB ENTéS mn-appiéaarx‘rs WCCJ 5??% i \(W Bhupemdra Kumar Sahu, 5/a 53i'ir*i wk: Ram Sahu, Aged abauf 39 year-a m3irxes Gwner, E/a ViHaga-Bamhni, Tahsii & b€s?r§c?~ Mahasamund (£5) 1. The Secrefary, S'rafe of Dapar?mar;f Chhai‘fisqar'h éf W‘Wimqhs MEeé' Manfrahya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipuw {56). 2V The Under Secrm‘ary, Dapar‘h‘nm’i :nf Minara§ RESaur‘ces, :‘v’iamr‘awya, D.K.55. Bhawan, Raipur {C(H {}A . Tha wrec‘i'ar, Mir-as mid f‘v’kmerm Rwour'ces‘ Smmkhan ghawan. Ring Qaad No}, ?uremi, Ravi émam, Raipur‘ {5(5) mThe Coilecfm‘, (Mines Setfmn), Mahasamumf (Ce). oi , Tha Chief Exeaufive {)fficar, WHage ?anchayaf - 6h$dari, Disfmcf Mahasamurrd {69). PE?I?EQN§§ AppHmnf u v5; ?ET‘ITE@N§R Apgiicam W‘F" {a} Nag??? {3F 2G0? Pranwd Madiiar, S/b Shri TT. Mu<§iiar, Aged abauf 46 years, Mmes Ommer, lo Ravigr‘am‘ Telibandha‘ Raipur (C6) ; p The' 3fafe of Chkaf‘i‘ia‘gurh, Through: Secrafary, Depxirfmari? fa? z’v‘Emes, Man’rmiaya, D.K.5. Bhawun, Qaipur f‘l‘\ b§j. 2. The Undar Secrei‘ary Depmd’mani‘ of :‘v‘umeran nc$aurca%: Mawraiaya, l F1... ED.K.S. Bhawan, The CcHacfoi-a (Mmas 5acf§m), Mahawmund (C9). The Chief Exacu?i‘v‘e G‘F‘Ficei‘, VHiage Panchayaf e‘viahasamund {C$). - $h0dari, Disw‘rici' 4:: 1U 3x WP (a) Ne.5980 Of: ZUG?’ Ramashray ¥aduv, 5/0 Shri Jed Kama ‘fadavf Aged abam 4i: years, fv’iénas Owner, R/a 6hadari, Tahsi! i§ Disfrfcf Mahasamand (€15) §a Tn; L- Direc’mrg AMI-res ana‘ Mi‘rier‘a§ Resources, Sonakhan %hawan, Ring Raw Na}, Purem, Ravi gram Raipur {6'5} Pcxge 2 of 7 Vs §ES?GND§NT5 1. The Sfa‘re of Chha‘H Non-applicaiifs Manfrulaya, D.K.5. (ca). y \ isgar‘h, Through: Mmes, Raipur 5ecre1'ar‘y, Depar¢menf of Bhawan', Ring Rand N01 ?urena Ravi 6ram Ralpu. (ca) 4. The Collecfar¢ (Mines 5 Mahasamund (C6). Officer 5A The Ch‘ief'EXecufive ecfian), ‘v‘iHage Pamhayat - Ghodari, Disfricf Mahasamund (C&). ?resenf: Mm Prashanf Jayaswai, 5r. Advoca‘fe with Mr. Shaiiendrq Sharmcg Advacafe a“ #he Mr. AIGk Eaksh§._&0vernmem Adyacafef Far 1‘he pafifioners in pefmaris. For ‘rhe State #he iie-‘rifians. in a“ ’Dhirwid'm mshra:_ J' 1. Heard. 2 W P (c’) N95 5978/07‘ 5979/07 & 5980/1)? we heing disposed OT by mis aommon order as m fhese pe‘h’nons The piJn‘mnars have impugned 'rhe order daTed 1772007 (Annexute F“ 14) passeci by the revisionai aufhori‘fy Le. Dmechw, Geoiogy & Mining Chhaffisgar'h, Raipur whereby The iearned' revis‘immi auThorHy exercising sac mom revisionai po'wer under Rule $8 of fhe C.6. Minor Minerais Rules, 1996 (for shorT ‘Rules, 1996‘) has se‘r aside ‘rhe 6rder da'red 24.3.2006V (Annexure P3} passed by G a A L» o R u E 3 (9gsse’d’"§n’ 7’” Defcemb‘erfZQW) respondenf No.4—Collec1‘or Mahasumund. 3. Briefiy s’rafed facts of fhe case are fha‘i‘ ’rhé pefifiamr‘a“ waw grannd mmmg iease for a period af Ten year: far mmmg hme 51‘one on 1he bank of Mahanadl Rwer m Dls'mcr Mahasamund in The vear 2000 a CommlHee was cohsfi’rufed 1’0 canSider the (Mines Sacficrf}, 2. The Under Secretary! Depari‘manf of Manfrahya, Mineral Resourcesl D.K.5. Bhawan, Raipur- (C$) 3‘ The Direc‘far, Mines and Minarai Resources Sonakhan Bhawan 1%ge 3 of 7 Q? effeci‘ of minmg an ‘irhe bmks of Mgxhanadi River arid i1“ was decided To cancel enfire mining iense on fhe bank3 of Mahmadi River. However, reiaxing Hie Ruies, as‘n speciai case: The pefifioners~ieqse holders were permi‘H’ed To opemTe mines for a fixed period "rill 31.12.2005 or Tili expiry of fheir Sease period, whichever is fear-Iiar, wi’rh a further comdi'tiorn "Hm? renewai of Ieasg would noT be done. Aocordingiy, supplemen‘rory iease deed was execufad vida Annexure P—Z. Before expiry of suppiememory iaasa period, Tho pe‘rifioner's applied for, renewa’i of lease deed or: 23.12.2604, however, ‘rhe some was rejecfad vide order of Annexuro P~3. The pe‘riTioners preferrad revision beforewrhe Secremry, Mirmg Depar‘men’r and during The oendency of revisiori fhe mmmg ieose was renewed from flme to hme vude Annexura F” The aovernmenf wde ordel du’red 22 6 2006 (Annexuro ? 6) d'smissed the rewslon permun Eeing aggrieved by fhe order of Annaxure F’wo, ’fha pen‘ri‘iionera‘ fiieci wri‘i' pafifion bearing WP (c) No.3882/06 mid The some was allowed vide order dufed 31.7.2006 cmcl fi'he orc’ier of revisional aui’hori'i’y was quashed and, The 5mm éovernmen? was direcfed 1‘0 consider applicufion of “the oe‘iifione‘rs for renewal of lea e do oovo and pass approprim‘e orclers ofTer giving opporfumfy of being heard To *rhe peTi‘rmneru. Thereoffer, ‘ihe Colleofor, Mahaoamund‘ vioe He order d’a‘fed 24.8.2009 (Arnexure P—3) renewed fhe lease for a perioéi of fen year5 for mining lime sforie which would expire ori l i2 2M5 However ihe respondenf No 3 Took up the mu‘rier on aw morn revmon undei Rule 58 of The Rule; 1996 issued no’rices fo The peimoners ride Annexure P 12 anal eef wide ihe orde. daie& 248 2u06 paased by Hie ColleCTor by me impugried order Fwy 4 of: “i \Q 4. Learned Senior Counsel for The peTiTioners argued ThaT rerxewal of mming {eizse has been rejec‘red wifhou'f giving cmy opportunify of hearing f0 fhe pe’rifioners. Minmg lease was renewecj by the Coliecfar for a period of Ten yearg vide orcier‘ of Annexure P~8. Since ‘rhe senior, officer's of The 5mm éovammenf hava glready confirmed The order 0f The Coiiecfor whergby iaase of The pgfifioners were renewed for a per-icci of Ten years, responder}? No.3 could ho’r have passed fhe impugned arder in The exercise of revisional jurisdic‘rion and fho order is in vioicn‘ion of Rule 58 of fha Rules, i996. The scmoTioned‘ mineo are nof near- ‘rha railway bridge bul' are a? a disiance of 500 meiers and the same are also a’r a dismnee of $00 me‘fers from *‘rhe bank of Mohanadi River. Referring i‘o documenls of Annexure P 9 P 10 6i P 11 If woe argued rho? m compliance of “the order of 1he High Courl fhe Mining Depam‘menf of The STa‘l’e of ChhoT‘lisgorh issued notice ’ro The permoners on 21 9 2009 (Annexure P 9) iii 5 10 2006 (Annexure P 10) for hear-mg and Thereof'rei' lhe order of The oolleci‘or whereby 'i’he mining leaae was renewed for fen year; was approved Referring fo Rule 58 (2) of The Rules, 1996 ii" was argued iha‘i since The mailer was pending wifh ihe Sia‘le eovei‘nmeni‘, fhe respondenf No.3 could noT have Token any oclion in ihe’ mailer. . On The oTher hand Mr Bakshi learned $overnmenT AdvocaTe appearing for The Smi‘e :ubmi‘is Thai as per Rule 5 (2) id) OT The Rules 1996 any area on The bank of river cannoT be leased for The purposes of mining and Therefore: by The impugned order The respondenT No.3‘has seT aside The order of renewal of lease granTed in favour of The peTiTioners by The CollecTo'r. The aforesaid order was passed afTer due noTice To The peTiTioners and afTe‘r affording Them opporT’uniTy of hearing as fhe pe‘fifionar‘s have submi‘Hed Haeir replies f0 ‘i’ha $Pmw wwa nofice and have aiso ‘Fiied wrifTen argumenfs of Anngxure P«13. From perugai cf Annexure P-ii, if is clear ThaT fhe Sw‘re Governmenf did no‘r approve ’rhe order 0f The Caiiacfm‘ as argued. Eyen ofherwise, renewai of ieqse Vida Annexure P8 was in confmvenfion of: fhe *erms and canciifianS 0f 'fhe suppiemevlmr‘y iease deed (Annexure P-Z) whereby We Rage. was ranewed for a fixed period up f0 31.12.2005 wifhom' any renewal clause and the peTifioners‘ were permi'Hed‘ 1o apemm mining iaase by relaxing The rules as aspecial case. o\ . I have heard learned counsei for fhe per‘i’ies. i have perua‘ea The recwd. From perusai of ‘ihe impugned order of Annaxure P'i, if x4 evident Thm‘ fhe peiifioners were gramed perrminsion ru commenca mining apem‘fion, asLu-speciqi base, re‘iaxing “ma rules on cerfmin qondi’iipm; gnd accordingly suppiemanfory mining lease deed qf Anngxur‘e F-Z wa$ anfared bei'wa'en fha pe‘i’ifinnem‘ and The deparfmenf on 25.5.2001. The ‘ierms ané concii‘rione under ’rhe suppiemenmry iease deeci are as feilows:— “1. Erik 3% a6 a? a: ‘qi‘a'Efi‘ala é??? tr? i%-:amEaUia‘ 3E§ii1citizga grief?! 2m mama a Era? \ a K 3m Ha? airiif‘aa‘ Eran aim 3E3Ii‘éitngé‘; Isnfiaa w arf‘irm ai' @Eiiaga aéf fire? 6min aan‘ Effie—ca 3Eai‘arrcgai' in awm wee: a‘é’i 2hr mifa; ii i‘aa’r aircraft” aii‘eam 65‘ Ei'aii PQ‘ .aa‘ara iii atrifira qwi‘aa min) Fae? ti? Fania? 255 V fireia‘iamr u? Firm Fm: arm E? ma: 3ia1aiar f‘a‘iii 2i arf 2008 an 2009 ans Gama E, 3E2? an i‘afiaa mfm win; 31.12.2005 Ems “en EEEII‘a'ErQ‘a Hanna 3iiri‘ar a“? iii an? Ei, eraa e} nagaif‘a ma 21% ara‘i git eiiirfga riar a? Ema“ maf‘zam m 2i i‘am'r an} min am $ a: a Era‘i eiaiam / i7 \ Page 5 of 7 era-view am?” 1‘ T Page 6 af 7 9P 3. @Efl’aga éW? 2% ah? tn HE?! a’taf‘w 33 3mm U? Utah? imam mien mm? Ema £5; 3? aw agar? aa’nar 3{f‘a'ma‘ Em: éifmca Mar x a’ x rm§ @5112? aE m-wmm‘i fawaii HEjEa‘rz abl‘r 3M}; 4. aim?! EéTQEI (Q? a? a‘q‘i a?‘ mg‘ am a? af‘ga?‘ a? aaa Ema; iiaW a‘an‘ az'i $V} mm Van? ?a¥tr§fa5 Emir? Em aéma air $¥ir 1 5. mam? a? 3mm Ema‘ 61W afaa f‘aammzrf} 1996 a?‘ Fafi€a Faamaaafa‘ Fm: mm E 311% 32m, f‘aam am sm‘gw WE 1952 53 qmana?’ m 3mm a Eh 6. a‘ata. a“ aim: c5 af‘aa‘aia a? 3M2 Hia‘a a: In an aft $ f‘EHEN“E qfETEiféra 2&1’aza mm? ® fEmar ’aiihrr § efa zfal $‘a5r ar arm E161 $ firm? EaHf‘zala 26w 2? ma f‘mm Eiréfm am rgif a?‘ Ema? mi ma? 51‘ 3m aréfm aTf‘m aa‘} a§ Waé? a? mm a «mm 25? lfaa‘t m 211%! 7. faa qgém?‘ WI mazfkr 3a 3211mm anf‘i: 39f mf‘an‘u: am: as? 31$; E mahmaw: mafin‘éi mé‘ ENE? In fimfw .mél'éI m firzaa Era? aniEair muzft $17 aéafh €ar EETIH" . The High Cour? Vida ifs order doTed 31.7.2006 quashed The order gmssed in revision preferred by fhe pai’ifionerg anti diracTad The 5mm Governmenf To consider fhe appiicaficn of fhe pe‘rifioners for'renewai of iedse die not/o and pags appropriate orders af‘rer‘ giving oppom‘unify ef being hecxrd f0 “ihe pe’iiiionei‘s. The Coileci‘or vidé ii‘s order da’red 24.8.2m36 (Annexur’e P-B) renawed The lease for a period of“ fen years from 1.1.2006 fo 31.12;2.015Hh0wever, The Addi'l'iwmi Chief Secre’r‘ary, Mining Deparimem‘", in ”the order sheaf dated 27.10.2006 (Annexure P41) ordered ihorf The iearned oounoel r for The pefiiioner in ihe High Cour? appearetj and informadj‘h Thu? The ma’rfer has been decided by The Coiieci’or, Mahasamund, Therefore, no furihér aciion is necessary oT The. X V Page 7 of 7 governmen‘r laveL Thereaffar‘: crder of' fhe Coiiecfor ww requisi’fion for perusxai. . Learned Senior Counsel for The peii’rioners could noi poini our fram fhe enzfire order $hee’rs as f0 when The arder of The § Coiiecfw was approved by ’rhe 51am Gaver‘nmen’r. IO. Respandan? No.3 in The impugned order has obsarved firm? fhe Coile¢for was required <ro make a’e nova enquiry afresh. as par direcfions of ‘rhe High Cour-"r: however, from perusal of The original record if is evideni’ Thai no \praper enquiry has been conducted. Mining lease spof is adjacenf To the rivar bait Reproducing The Terms and condifipns of The arder of Annexure P—i under which ’rhe pefifioner was permif’i‘ed 1‘0 cammence mining, as a special case, by relaxing The rules, il‘ has been observed fha‘f The abave arder has affained finali‘fy as if has no? been challenged in .any eourl of law. Furiher referring f0 The prwnsnons 9f amended rules and fhe order of ihe Srai‘e Governmen‘f daiad 14 5 2001 "the order of renevm. da’red 24 8 2006 (Annexure P 8) has been se‘i‘ asude Af‘fer carefully examining 'i'he ee‘ndiiians 0f The supplemenmry i1. lease deed (Annexure P-2}, which has been reproduced in ihe faregoing paragraghs, arder daTed I4.5.2G0i (Annexure P4) passed by the Siafe Governmen-f and alsa‘ considering The Ruie 5 (2) (d) of The Rules, 1961, I am elf The opinian ‘iha'f respandenf No.3 herein has righfly cancelled The lease deed in exercise of 5w mam powers of revision under Rule 5B of The Rules, 1996. 12.In The resulf, The peii’rions have no subsiance, The same deserve fo be dismissed and are accordingiy dismiesed. Roshan/a Sdl- Dhlrendra Mlshra Judge