Mahanand Singh and Others vs District Magistrate and Another

M. Katju and Rakesh Tiwari, JJ.—The Petitioners made an application under Rule 6 of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. They have prayed that the said application may be directed to be decided. No doubt Rule 8 of the above Rules prescribes the manner of disposal of the application, but in our opinion Rule 8 is to be read along with Article 14 of the Constitution as interpreted in Ramana Dayaram Shetty Vs. International Airport Authority of India and Others,

In our opinion, the Rules cannot override the constitutional provisions and have to be read in consonance with the same, otherwise they will be ultra vires. Hence if any application for mining lease is made under Rule 6 of the Rules, there must be an advertisement in well known newspapers having wide circulation and thereafter, there should be a public auction or tender in which all eligible persons can participate, otherwise, there will be a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Let a copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General as well as the learned Chief Standing Counsel to the Secretary, Industrial Development, U.P., as well as the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, who will circulate it to all the District Magistrates as well as the other relevant authorities who deal with these matters.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally.