M/S.Nila Mines Private Limited v. Union Of India
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.02.2016
CORAM
The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P.No.4240 of 2016 and WMP.Nos.3589 & 3590 of 2016 M/s.Nila Mines Private Limited, 137, Pudurpadiapuram, Tuticorin-628 002, rep. by its Director C.Selwin Prabhu .. Petitioner -vs1.Union of India, rep. by the Secretary to Government, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110 001.
2.Under Secretary to Government, Government of India, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110 001.
3.Secretary (Industry), Department of Industries, Government of Tamilnadu, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
4.Indian Bureau of Mines, Office of the Chief Controller of Mines, 2nd Floor, Indira Bhavan, Civil Lines, Seminari Hills, Nagpur, Maharashtra-440 001.
5.Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy, Anushakti Bhavan, C.S.M. Marg, Mumbai-400 001.
6.Director (Atomic Minerals Division), Directorate of Exploration & Research, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Telangana-500 016.
.. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Declaration declaring Section 10(A)(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 (10 of 2015) as null and void and consequently direct the respondents to consider the eligible application of the petitioner dated 17.02.2006 under Section 10 (A)(2) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 as it was in force on the date of the application filed by the petitioner within a time frame.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thiagarajan Senior Counsel for Mr.Kalyanaraman for M/s.Aiyar and Dolia For Respondents: Mr.Su.Srinivasan Asst. Solicitor General for R1,2,4 to 6 Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Special G.P. for R3
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner seeks to lay a challenge to the legislative amendment made vide notification dated 27.03.2015 amending the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, more specifically Section 10(A)(1).
2. The petitioner had applied for mining lease on 17.02.2006 in respect of the patta lands in S.F.No.114/1A at K.Thangammalpuram village for garnet, ilmenite, zircon and rutile (all are major minerals). The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Tuticorin inspected the site and submitted his technical report dated 18.12.2007.
The Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Tamilnadu/respondent No.3 recommended and approved the requests vide letter dated 28.09.2010 and the application was forwarded on 14.02.2011 to the first respondent/Union of India, Ministry of Mines, New Delhi.
3. The matter rested at that and suffice to say that writ petitions were filed by the petitioner being W.P.(MD) Nos.3164 to 3166 of 2013 before the Madurai Bench, in which orders were passed on 16.05.2013, directing consideration of the applications within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
4. A subsequent development took place in the form of the communication by the Ministry of Mines dated 17.10.2013 to the State Government to the effect that the applications were lacking in certain requirements as per the guidelines of the Ministry dated 24.06.2009 and thus not agreeing with the State Government's proposal for grant of mining lease. The proposal was returned with a request to resubmit the same. The relevant portion of the rejection order is extracted as under:- "I am directed to refer to State Government's letters No.19524/MMD1/2010-1 dated 14.2.2011 and subsequent correspondence dated 22.8.2011 on the above mentioned subject. The proposal has been examined in the Ministry in consultation with the India Bureau Mines (IBM) and the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE).
Based on their comments, it is seen that mineralization in the subject area has not been quantified as per UNFC norms. Further, IBM/DAE has not confirmed whether an optimal and scientific mining plan for the subject area can be prepared. As such, the requirements of para 4.1 to 4.3 of this Ministry's guidelines dated 24.6.2009 are not fulfilled.
2.In view of the foregoing, it is not possible to agree to the State Government's proposal for grant of Mining Lease in the said area, and accordingly the proposal is returned herewith with the request to re-submit the same (if required) with categorical comments on mineralization as per the UNFC norms, inter-alia precisely bringing out UNFC code applicable to this case."
5. The aforesaid orders have been assailed by the petitioner by filing W.P.Nos.32178 to 32180 of 2013, which are stated to be pending with no interim orders.
6. Thereafter, the amendment to the Act has taken place by insertion of Section 10(A)(1), which provides that all applications received prior to the date of commencement of the amendment to the Act would become ineligible. The relevant portion of the amended Act is extracted as under:- "After section 10 of the principal Act, the following sections shall be inserted, namely - 10A.(1) All applications received prior to the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 shall become ineligible."
7. It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has a vested right of consideration of its application and they cannot be made to apply afresh under the new norms. On our query, he concedes that per se, he cannot lay a challenge to the amendment, but the challenge arises out of the fact that the pre-amendment application was returned to be represented, which aspect is under challenge. Admittedly, the State Government never represented the application. The crux of the argument is that the amendment issued for consideration of the application of the petitioner is sought to be defeated by the legislative amendment and thus, such an amendment would be violative of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax and others v.
Netley "B" Estate and others, reported in (2015) 11 SCC 462. The said pronouncement dealt with the issue of the tests to determine the limits of the legislative action vis-a-vis Court's verdict and since in the facts of the case the legislature has not directly overruled decision of any Court, but has only rendered such decision ineffective by removing the basis on which the decision was arrived at, the validity was upheld.
8. We may note that the aforesaid judgment deals with a taxing statute. In the present case, the issue is really not of any statutory right, but for a writ of mandamus confined to the aspect of the consideration of the application. The law which should be applicable should be as on the date of consideration. The consideration has not taken place as yet. The law stands amended to the extent of the amending statute.
9. In view of the aforesaid, we cannot find fault with the amending statute, to which the challenge is sought to be laid in the present writ petition.
10. The writ petition is dismissed.
No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110 001.
2.The Under Secretary to Government, Government of India, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110 001.
3.The Secretary (Industry), Department of Industries, Government of Tamilnadu, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
4.Indian Bureau of Mines, Office of the Chief Controller of Mines, 2nd Floor, Indira Bhavan, Civil Lines, Seminari Hills, Nagpur, Maharashtra-440 001.
5.The Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy, Anushakti Bhavan, C.S.M. Marg, Mumbai-400 001.
6.The Director (Atomic Minerals Division), Directorate of Exploration & Research, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Telangana-500 016.
+1cc to MS.Aiyar & Dolia, Advocate, S.R.No.8093 +1cc to Mr.SU.Srinivasan, Advocate, S.R.No.7349 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.7496 W.P.No.4240 of 2016 bvr(CO) srg(15/02/2016)