Chattu Ram Darshan Ram vs State Of Bihar And Ors

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Mines Department.

Petitioner is the lessee of an area measuring 2,455.54 acres in village Belam and other surrounding villages within Rajauli police station of Nawada district. He has been served with notice bearing letter no.690 dated 13.10.2005, Annexure-1 by the District Mining Officer, Nawada calling upon him to pay arrears of dead rent/royalty amounting to Rs.39,89,320/- by 5.11.2005.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that mining lease was renewed for a period of 20 years on 6.12.1985 with effect from 1.5.1983. After renewal of the mining lease petitioner was served with letter dated 16.12.1989, Annexure-3 by the Divisional Forest Officer, Gaya Forest Division asking him not to proceed with the mining activity in the area leased out to him as major portion of the lands leased out to him is forest area but before renewal of the lease permission from the Government of India to carry on mining operation in the forest area was not taken in the light of the provisions of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and the Indian Forest Act, 1927. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the light of the instructions of the Forest Officer dated 16.12.1989 petitioner has not been conducting mining activity in the forest area and the impugned notice issued for deposit of the arrears of dead rent/royalty is required to be modified in the light of the aforesaid instructions of the District Forest Officer.

Counsel for the Mining Department refuted the submission and stated that mining lease of the petitioner was renewed on 6.12.1985 with effect from 1.5.1983, in the light of the renewal made petitioner remained in possession of the leased area through out, after receipt of letter dated 16.12.1989 from the Forest Officer, he never asked the authorities to reduce the area of lease, in the circumstances, he is required to pay dead rent/royalty for the entire area, which has remained in his possession. It is also submitted that it is a question of investigation by the authorities of the department as to whether petitioner actually stopped mining activity in the area after receipt of letter dated 16.12.1989 or he continued with mining operation and just to avoid the notice dated 13.10.2005 is raising the plea that he has been obstructed by the authorities of the Forest Department from mining over the leased area.

In rejoinder counsel for the petitioner submitted that out of the leased area of 2455.54 acres, 41.80 acres is out side the forest area over which mining activity has been conducted by the petitioner and for conducting such mining operation over 41.80 acres of land petitioner has already deposited the arrears of dead rent/royalty.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having considered the provisions of the Indian forest Act, 1927 and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, I am of the view that in the forest area no mining activity can be conducted without the permission being accorded by the Central Government. It is thus required to be enquired into as to how mining lease of the petitioner over 2455.54 acres of land major portion whereof is forest was renewed on 6.12.1985 with effect from 1.5.1983. While conducting the aforesaid enquiry the authorities should also find out the actual area over which mining operation has been conducted by the petitioner after renewal of his lease with effect from 1.5.1983 and ensure payment of dead rent/royalty for the land over which mining activity was conducted by the petitioner. The enquiry in compliance of this order be conducted and appropriate final order be passed by the competent authority, as early as possible, in any case within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the District Mining Officer, Nawada. Until final order is passed, no coercive measure be taken against the petitioner.

The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of.