Pawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar & Ors.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. V.M.K.Sinha(Spl.Pp.Mines) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH) 8 23-01-2012 Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mines Department. The petitioner was the highest bidder of public auction held on 25.2.2009 for Plot No.723(P) Block I at Mauza Basa, Rohtas having bidded a sum of Rs.12,56,00,000/-. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.20 lakhs by way of Bank Drafts as the security money and further deposited a sum of Rs.1,05,60,000/- by way of Banks cheque at the time of the auction itself and the balance to be paid in five yearly equal installments. The petitioner states that illegal mining was going on in the area and even the plot in respect of which he had bidded was encroached by illegal mining. He made Patna High Court CWJC No.8837 of 2009 (8) dt.23-01-2012 various representations before the authorities for demarcating the area allowed to him so that he could do mining without interference. Counsel for the Mines Department submits that an amendment has been made in Bihar Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2010. As per amending Rule 53, no mining lease for stone shall be granted. However, sub-rule(2) of Rule 53 states that existing leases for stone granted under rule 9 and rule 52 would be allowed to subsist for the remaining period for which they have already been granted but they shall not be renewed thereafter. It is submitted that out of term of five years, three years have already elapsed and at most the petitioner can be entitled for doing mining for a period of two years. Counsel for the Mines Department submits that no illegal mining was going on in the area which was allotted to the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that he did not do any mining area in the last two years and as such he would be exempted of making any payment in view of circumstances narrated above. The petitioner states that nonetheless he is willing to compensate the loss suffered by Patna High Court CWJC No.8837 of 2009 (8) dt.23-01-2012 the State by paying the due interest of the period already over. He further submits that he would make due payment for the remaining period of the lease. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, if the petitioner appears before the Commissioner of Mines, along with a copy of this order, with a concrete proposal to compensate the loss suffered by the State, the same would be considered in accordance with law and the order be passed within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. KHAN/- (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)