JANAK LAL versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Citation: [1989] 3 S.C.R. 830 · Decided: 10-08-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L.M. SHARMA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
JANAK LAL 
·;,, 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. 
AUGUST 10, 1989 
B 
(LALIT MOHAN SHARMA AND J.S. VERMA, JJ.] 
"' 
).-< 
J~ 
Mineral C-oncession Rules, 1960: Rules 58 & 59--Reserved land 
,-
... 
granted for mining without public notification-Validity of. 
I 
Words and Phrases: 'reserved for any purpose'-Meaning of-
, .. 
c Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, Rule 59. 
~-' 
Rule 58 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, which deals with 
I 
availability of areas for regrant of a mining lease, requires a notifica-
1 
lion to be published in the offical gazette at least 30 days in advance. 
Rule 59 directs the procedure laid down in Rule 58 to be followed in the 
D case of any land in respect of which the State Government had refused 
to grant a prospeding licence or a mining lease on the ground that it 
was required to be reserved for any purpose. The expression "reserved 
for any purpose" was earlier followed by the words "other than 
prospecting or mining for minerals", which was omitted by an amend-
ment in 1963. 
't-
E 
~
An application for grant of mining lease in respect of the disputed 
area had been rejected earlier on the ground that it was reserved for 
I 
some other purpose. Subsequently, however, a mining lease in regard 
to the said area was granted in favour of respondent No. 4. The appel-
'
Iant challenged the allotment on the ground that the procedµre for 
F settlement as laid down in Rule 59 read with Rule 58 was not followed 
J:_-
-f-
before the grant. The High Court dismissed that application on the 
.. 
ground that Rule 59 was confined to cases where earlier reservation was 
made for mining purposes. 
Allowing the appeal, 
G 
HELD: I. The grant of mining lease in favour of respondent No. 
4 was illegally made in violation of Rule 58 of the Mineral Concession 
.
Rules, 1960. [833E-F] 
""" 
2.1 Rule 59 covered the instant case. Earlier the only category 
'f
H which was excluded from the application of this 'tule was prospecting 
830 
JI
-t 
\ 
JANAK LAL v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (SHARMA, J.] 
831 
or mining leases. The effect of the 1963 amendment is that by omitting 
the words "other than prospecting or mining for minerals", prospect· 
ing and mining leases have also been placed in the same position as _the 
other cases. The other cases to which the Rule applied earlier have not 
thus been excluded. [833E-B) 
2.2 It is clearly in the public interest to notify the proposal to 
grant a mining lease. The State and its authorities will, in that case, 
itave the choice of selecting the most suitable person by following the 
just and equitable criteria hiid down by the Rules. [833D) 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3255 
of 1989. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.7.1985 of the Bombay 
High Court in W.P. No. 2137of1979. 
V.A. Bobde, S.D. Mudaliar and A.G. Ratnaparkhi for the 
A 
B 
c 
Appellant. 
D 
S.K. Dholakia, A.S. Bhasme and A.M. Khanwilkar for 'the 
Respondents. 
For the Respondent No. 4-in person (not present). 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SHARMA, J. Notice for final disposal of the case was served on 
the respondents. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Special 
leave is granted. 
2. This case is dependent on the correct meaning and scope of 
Rule 59 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to 
as the Rules). A certain area in village Bazargaon, District Nagpur was 
reserved for Nistar purposes (that is, for grazing of cattle etc.). The 
respondent No. 4 applied for grant of a mining lease in regard to the 
said area which was allowed. The appellant, who is a local resident, 
challenged the allotment on the ground that the procedure for settle-
ment as laid down in Rule 59 read with Rule 58 was not followed 
before the grant. 
E 
F 
G 
3. Rule 58 deals with availability of areas for re-grant of a 
mining lease and requires an entry to that effect to be made in a 
H 
A 
B 
c 
832 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1989] 3 S.C.R. 
register referred to in Rule 21(2) of the Rules, and a notification tO"be 
published in the official gazette at least 30 days in advance. The 
purpose obviously is to enable the members of general public to apply 
for the proposed lease. Rule 59 directs the procedure in Rule 58 to be 
followed in the c;ises mentioned thereunder in the following terms: 
"59. Availability of certain areas for grant to be notified-
In the case of any land which is otherwise available for the 
grant of a prospecting licence or a mining lease but 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.