Babli Mishra vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4866 Cal

Form J(2)      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
              CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                             Appellate Side


Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri


                        WPA 24562 of 2012

                           Babli Mishra
                                Vs.
                   The State of West Bengal & Ors.


Mr. Mir Anowar
           ..for the petitioner

Mr. Chandi Charan De, Ld. Addl. Govt. Pleader
Mr. Anirban Sarkar
Mr. Sadhan Halder
           ..for the State

Item No.44

Heard & Judgment on:          08.08.2023

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

Affidavit of service be kept with the record.

A mining lease deed was executed by and between the

petitioner and the State Government on 31 st January, 2007. It is not

in dispute that possession of the mining block was handed over to the

petitioner after expiry of about four years on 7 th April, 2011. The

petitioner made an application to the Additional District Magistrate

and D.L. & L.R.O., Burdwan requesting him to allow the petitioner to

extract sand from the lease hold block for a full term of five years

from the date of handing over possession. The said application was

rejected by the jurisdictional D.L.& L.R.O.

Hence, the instant writ petition.

The learned Additional Government Pleader submits that the

instant writ petition is not maintainable in view of the provision

contained in Rule 16 of the West Bengal Minor Minerals Rules, 2002.

Rule 16 runs thus:_

"16. Lapsing of lease.- (1) Subject to the other condition in

these rules, where mining operation has not been commenced with a

period of one year from the date of execution of the lease or is

discontinued for a continuous period of one year after the

commencement of such operations, the State Government shall, by

an order, declare the mining lease as lapsed and communicate the

said order to the lessee.

(2) Where a lessees is unable to commence the mining

operation within a period of one year from the date of execution of

the mining lease or discontinues mining operations for a period

exceeding one year for reasons beyond his control, he may submit an

application to the State Government through the Chief Mining Officer

or the Mining Officer in charge of the concerned area explaining the

reasons for the same within a period of one month after such expiry

of the said one year.

(3) Every such application under sub-rule (2) shall be

accompanied by a fee of five hundred rupees deposited in the

manner provided in sub-rule (3) of rule 5.

(4) The State Government may, on receipt of an application

make under sub-rule (2) and on being satisfied about

reasons for the non-commencement of mining operations

or discontinuance, pass an order extending or refusing to

extend the period of lease, as the case may be, within six

months after giving the applicant an opportunity of being

heard.

Explanation.- Where the non-commencement of mining

operations within a period of one year from the date of

execution of mining lease is on account of:

(a) delay in acquisition of surface rights;

(b) delay in getting the possession of the leased area;

or

(c) delay in supply or installation of machinery;

(d) orders passed by any statutory or competent

authority; or

(e) operation becoming highly uneconomical; or

(f) strike or lock-out.

And the lessee is able to furnish documentary evidence

supported by an affidavit duly sworn in, the State

Government may consider any or all of these as sufficient

reasons for the non-commencement of mining operations

within the said period of one year."

As per the provision of sub-rule (2) of Rule 16 where a

lessee discontinues mining operations for a period of

exceeding one year for reasons beyond his control, he

may submit an application to the State Government

through the Chief Mining Officer or the Mining Officer in

charge of the concerned area explaining the reasons for

the same within a period of one month after such expiry

of the said one year.

Admittedly deed of lease was executed on 31 st January,

2007. When the petitioner did not get possession of the

mining block within a period of one year of execution of

the lease deed, he could have filed the application within

one month after such expiry of the said one year.

However, the petitioner, in the instant case filed

application on 3rd November, 2011 i.e. after the expiry of

eleven months from the date of expiry of the term of the

entire lease deed.

In view of such circumstances, I am in agreement

with the learned advocate for the State respondents that

the instant writ petition is not maintainable for violation of

the provision contained in Rule 16 of the West Bengal

Minor Minerals Rules, 2002.

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed

on contest.

There shall be, however, no order as to costs.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)