STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER versus M/S. CHIRANJILAL (MINERAL) INDUSTRIES OF BAGANDIH AND ANOTHER

Citation: [2023] 12 S.C.R. 277 · Decided: 12-09-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJIV KHANNA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2023] 12 S.C.R. 277 : 2023 INSC 824
277
CASE DETAILS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER
v.
M/S. CHIRANJILAL (MINERAL) INDUSTRIES OF BAGANDIH 
AND ANOTHER
(Civil Appeal No. 8238 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2023 
[SANJIV KHANNA AND ARAVIND KUMAR, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for consideration: Intra-court appeal preferred by the State of 
West Bengal before the High Court was dismissed with the direction to the 
Appellant No. 2 – Joint Secretary, Department of Industries, Commerce 
and Enterprises, West Bengal or any authorised oﬃ  cer to execute a mining 
lease in favour of the Respondent No. 2, sole proprietor of Respondent No. 
1 - M/s. Chiranjilal (Mineral) Industries of Bagandih.
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – s. 
10-A – Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment 
Act, 2015 – Concession Rules, 2016 – r.61 and Proviso – Directions issued 
to the government of West Bengal to execute a mining lease in favour 
of respondent no.1-M/s. Chiranjilal (Mineral) Industries of Bagandih:
Held: It is the stand of the appellants – State of West Bengal, that 
they are owners of 20.87 acres of the land in question and to this extent, 
they have no diﬃ  culty in executing the mining lease – This being the stated 
stand, which has also been aﬃ  rmed, there should be no diﬃ  culty in granting 
of mining lease for the said area to the Respondent No. 1-M/s. Chiranjilal 
(Mineral) Industries of Bagandih – So, it is directed that the government of 
West Bengal will execute a mining lease for 20.87 acres of land in favour 
of the Respondent No. 1 – The claim of the Respondent No. 1 towards the 
balance area for the grant of mining lease will be treated as rejected and 
dismissed. [Paras 20 and 22]
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – 
sub-section (1) to Section 10-A Mines and Minerals (Development and 
278
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2023] 12 S.C.R.
Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 – Object and purpose of amendment 
– Application of exceptions or the saving clauses in three kinds of 
situations:
Held: The object and purpose of the Amendment Act, 2015 is to 
ensure that allocation of mineral resources is done through auctioning 
– This is the reason why sub-section (1) to Section 10-A of the MMDR 
Act, 1957 mandates that all applications received prior to 12.01.2015 
shall become ineligible – The exceptions or the saving clause applies to 
three kinds of situations speciﬁ ed in sub-section (2) to Section 10-A of the 
MMDR Act, 1957 – The ﬁ rst category is where an application has been 
received u/s. 11-A of the MMDR Act,1957 – The second category is where 
a reconnaissance permit or a prospecting licence has been granted the 
permit holder or the licensee has the right to obtain a prospecting licence 
followed by a mining lease and the State Government is satisﬁ ed that the 
permit holder or the licensee has complied with the requirements speciﬁ ed 
in sub-clauses (i) to (iv) of clause (b) of sub-section (2) to Section 10-A of 
the MMDR Act, 1957 – The reason for protecting this class of cases is on 
account of the fact that they had altered their position by spending money 
on reconnaissance operations or prospecting operations – Accordingly, the 
principle of legitimate expectation is applied – The third category is where 
the Central Government had already communicated their previous approval 
or the State Government had issue Letter of Intent for grant of mining lease 
before coming into force of the Amendment Act 2015 – The raison dêtre, 
it is observed therein, is that certain rights had accrued to these applicants 
inasmuch as all necessary procedures and formalities had been complied 
with and only formal lease remains to be executed. [Para 14]
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – 
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 
2015 – A Grant Order dated 16.07.2015 was issued by the Deputy 
Secretary, Commerce and Industries Department, West Bengal for 
Dolomite mining in favour of Respondent No. 1 - M/s. Chiranjilal 
(Mineral) Industries of Bagandih in respect of 76 acres of land, subject 
to certain conditions – Whether approval of the Central Government 
required or not:
279
Held: Though in the present case, post notiﬁ cation No. S.O. 423(E) 
dated 10.02.2015, Dolomite was notiﬁ ed as a minor mineral and hence, 
the approval of the Central Government was not required for the reason 
that the Grant Order dated 16.07.2015 was hedged with pre-co
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.