LexMONNET ISPAT & ENERGY LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012] 7 S.C.R. 644 MONNET ISPAT & ENERGY LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 3285 of 2009 etc.) JULY 26, 2012 [R.M. LODHA, AND H.L. GOKHALE, JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950: c Art.294, First Schedule - State Government's ownership in mines and minerals within its territory - Held: Erstwhile State of Bihar being a part-A State specified in First Schedule and prior thereto the Province of Bihar, by virtue of Art. 294 all properties and assets which were vested in His Majesty for 0 the purpose of the Government of Province of Bihar stood vested in corresponding State of Bihar - By the Bihar Act, 1950, all other lands, i.e. estates and tenures of whatever kind including the mines and minerals therein stood vested in the State of Bihar - Pursuant to Bihar Re-Organisation Act, 2000, E all land, inter alia, belonging to the then State of Bihar and situated in the transferred territories passed to the newly created State of Jharkhand which is the owner of the subject area - Mines and minerals within its territory vest in it absolutely - Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Bihar Re- organization Act, 2000 - Jurisprudence-' Ownership'. F Seventh Schedule - List I, Entry 54, List II, Entry 23 read with Entry 18 - Minerals - Iron ore - Right of State Government to reserve mining area for public sector exploitation - Held: The authority of State Government flows G from the fact that it is the owner of the mines and the minerals within its territory - Rule 59 of 1960 Rules clearly contemplates reservation by an order of State Government - Provisions that follow s.2 of 1957 Act have left untouched the State's ownership of mines and minerals within its territory H 644 MONNET ISPAT & ENERGY LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 645 AND ORS. although regulation of mines and the development of minerals A have been taken under control of the Union - Therefore, reservation made by State Government under Notifications dated 21.12.1962, 28.02.1969 and 27.10.2006 is not at all contrary to or inconsistent with 1957 Act- These notifications do not impinge upon the legislative power of the Central B Government - Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 - ss. 2 to 17-A - Mineral Concession Rules 1960 - rr. 58, 59 and 63A. Arts. 19(1)(g), 39, and 299 - Right to carry on any trade or business - Government contracts - State Government of C Jharkhand recommending to Union Government to grant mining lease to certain companies - Subsequently, realizing that the subject area had already been reserved for public sector exploitation, it withdrew the proposal and issued a further notification declaring that iron ore deposits in the D subject area would not be thrown to private sector - Held: No person has any fundamental right or any right to claim that he should be granted mining lease or prospecting licence or permitted reconnaissance operation in any land belonging to Government except under 1957 Act and the 1960 Rules - It E is true that by the MOU entered into between State Government and appellants, certain commitments were made by State Government but firstly, such MOU is not a contract as contemplated under Art. 299(1) and secondly, in grant of mining lease of a property of the State, the State Government F has discretion to grant or refuse to grant any mining lease - Obviously, State Government is required to exercise its discretion, subject to the requirement of law - In view of the fact that the area is reserved for exploitation of mineral in public sector, it cannot be said that the discretion exercised G by State Government suffers from any legal flaw. Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957: s. 17-A read with rr. 58 and 59 of 1960 Rules - Approval H 646 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 7 S.C.R. A of Central Government for grant of mining lease - Held: Rule 58 as amended in 1980 expressly provided that the State Government by Notification in the official gazette can reserve any area for exploitation in public sector - The amendments have been effected only to make explicit what was implicit and B they cannot be read to nullify the powers which the State Government otherwise had under the statute - On coming into force of s.17-A, r.58 has been omitted - According to s.17- A(2). the State Government with the approval of Central Government may reserve any area not already held under any C mining lease, to undertake mining
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.