STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. versus ARAVALI KHANIJ UDYOG AND ANR.

Citation: [2007] 11 S.C.R. 180 · Decided: 12-10-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: TARUN CHATTERJEE · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
STATEOF~YANAANDANR. 
v. 
ARA V ALI KHANIJ UDYOG AND ANR. 
OCTOBER 12, 2007 
[TARUN CHATTERJEE AND P. SATHASIVAM,JJ.) 
Mines and Minerals: 
Metalliferrous Mines Regulation, 1961-Regulation 106-Mining 
lease granted in favour of Respondent--Respondent submitted 
representation seeking extension of the lease-Representation rejected 
by State Government-By that time lease granted in favour of 
Respondent had expired-High Court set aside order passed by State 
Government and directed Respondent to be put into possession of the 
lease-Direction of High Court granting relief in favour of 
Respondent-Held: Cannot be implemented at this juncture in view 
of the subsequent developments- viz. a) creation of third party rights 
in respect of the site in question and b) orders of Supreme Court 
prohibiting mining operation in the entire area-Respondent, however, 
free to approach appropriate court for damages/compensation. 
Lease of mining granted in favour of Respondent expired on 
17-02-2000. However, it is the grievance of Respondent that because 
of the conduct of the Mining Department, they were not in a position 
to mine for a period of 850 days, hence they are entitled to extension 
of mining lease by 850 days for which they made a representation 
on 01-03-1999. The said representation was rejected by the State 
Government, which order was set aside by the High Court which is 
a subject-matter of th~ present appeals. 
Disposing of the appeals, the Court 
HELD:l.1. In view of the fact that the lease granted in favour 
of the Respondent had expired long ago and in the light of the 
180 
..... 
'r 
1 
-A. 
,-
~ 
r 
;-
ST ATE v. ARA V ALI KHANIJUDYOG 
181 
/. 
,,. 
subsequent developments as well as orders of this Court, it is A 
unnecessary to traverse the claim of both the parties in detail. 
[Para 6] (183-G; 184-A] 
1.2. Appellants by placing an affidavit of Shri S.K.Gupta, 
Assistant Mining Engineer, Gurgaon, Department of Mines and B 
Geology, Haryana dated 11.10.2007 submitted that after expiry of 
lease period granted in favour of the respondent, the extraction rights 
;/ 
for minor mineral from the site in question were auctioned on 
~-
20.12.2001 and given to Mis Dolphin Minerals, Gurgaon who was 
the highest bidder. He also submitted that the said auction was 
challenged by the Respondent by filing C.W.P.19798 of2001 before c 
the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and ultimately the High Court 
dismissed the said writ petition on 12.09.2002. The said information 
in the affidavit of the Mining Engineer is relevant. 
(Para 7] [184-C, D, E] 
D 
} 
1.3. In view of the above factual information and of the fact that 
the third party rights having been created, no relief could be granted 
~ 
in favour of the respondent at this juncture. [Para 8] [184-G] 
1.4. In the same affidavit, the officer bas stated that the mineral 
extraction of the said site, along with all other sites falling in Aravalis E 
in Dist. Gurgaon has been stopped pursuant to the orders passed 
by this Court in MC. Mehta and TN Godavarman Thirumalpad case. 
In this regard, the appellants placed an order passed by this Court 
on 16.12.2002 wherein this Court prohibited mining operation in 
forest areas. As on date, the said direction is in force. 
f 
·-j 
(Para 9] [184-H; 185-A, E] 
'"i 
1.5. In view of the same, the direction of the High Court 
granting relief in favour of the respondent cannot be implemented 
at this juncture. However, the respondent is free to approach the 
appropriate court for damages/compe_nsation if the same are G 
permissible in accordance with law. [Para 11] (185-G; 186-AJ 
~-
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5874 of 
2000. 
From the Judgment and final Order dated 9.5.2000 of the High Court H 
182 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 11 S.C.R. 
A of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No. 3007 of2000. 
WITH 
Civil Appeal No. 4855 of 2007. 
Manjit Singh, AAG., Anup G. Chaudhary and June Chaudhari, 
B Harikesh Singh, Devendra Kumar Singh, T.V. George and KB. Rohtagi 
c 
for ~e appearing Parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
P. SATHASIV AM, J. 
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5874 OF 2000. 
(1) Secretary to Government, Mines and Geology Department, 
Haryana and Director of Mines and Geology, Government ofHaryana 
aggrieved by the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 
09.05.2000 made in C.W.P. No. 3007of2000 have filed the above 
D appeal. 
BRIEF FACTS: 
(2) On 18.02.1980, lease of min

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