Daljeet Singh Saggu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Vivek Rusia, J

The petitioner has filed this present petition seeking following relief(s):-

"I. to call for entire relevant record.

II. to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the respondent to grant mining lease to the petitioner, which he applied on 31.05.2010 & 26.03.2012 which are pending and under process with the authority.

III. Any other relief together cost of the petition which this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case may also be awarded in favor of the petitioner."

During the pendency of this petition, section 10A has been inserted. The respondents filed their return. Relevant paragraph-11 is reproduced as under:-

"11. That, the mineral Dolomite was designated as minor mineral vide gazette notification dated 10.02.2015. This shows that prior to 10.02.2015 mineral Dolomite was a major mineral. Regarding major minerals, an amendment to the MMDR Act of 1957 was enacted on 12.01.2015, introducing Section 10A(1) which stipulates that all applications received prior to the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Ordinance, 2015 shall become ineligible. It is apparent from the Section 10A(1) of the MMDR Act of 1957 that the prospecting license applied by the petitioner for the aforesaid area deemed to have been lapsed on 12.01.2015 in view of Section 10A(1) of the MMDR Act of 1957 as at this relevant point of time, mineral Dolomite was a major mineral. Certain documents referenced by the petitioner, such as the note-sheets included in Annexure-P/7, would loose their relevance following the introduction of Section 10A(1) in the MMDR Act of 1957. Accordingly, the State has rightly rejected the prospecting license applied by the petitioner on 15.06.2016 in view of Section 10A(1) of the MMDR Act of 1957. As stated above, the petitioner has not challenged this order dated 15.06.2016 in the present petition due to which the present petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. Moreover, the bare perusal of the order dated 29.03.2011 (Annexure P/6), order dated 26.02.2011 (Annexure-P/6) & order dated 30.09.2015 (Annexure-P/10) shows that the prospecting license was never granted to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to assert any rights with respect to prospecting license."

In view of the above, nothing survives in this petition. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to apply under the relevant provision. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.