Chattisgarh High Court
Sarda Energy And Minerals Limited vs Union Of India on 30 January, 2023
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
Writ Petition (C) No. 232 of 2023
Sarda Energy and Minerals Limited Having Its Office At Industrial Growth Centre,
Siltara, Raipur Chhattisgarh 493111 Through Its Authorised Signatory Mr. Ashish
Mishra Aged About 44 Years Son of Shri P.P. Mishra Resident of House No. 135,
Sanskar City, Dhansuli, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Pin-493111, Presently Working as
Deputy Manager Legal.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India Through The Secretary, Ministry of Mines, Govt. of India
Shastri Bhawan (C-Wing) Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi 110001
2. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Ministry Resources
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
3. District Collector, District - Narayanpur (C.G.)
4. District Mining Officer, District Narayanpur. (C.G.)
5. Director, Directorate of Geology and Mining, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar,
Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
6. Regional Head, Directorate of Geology and Mining, Regional Office
Jagdalpur, Vijay Bhawan In Front of Commissioners Office Jagdalpur
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
30/01/2023 Heard Mr. Ratan Kumar Singh, learned senior counsel,
assisted by Mr. Siddharth Dubey, learned counsel for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy
Solicitor General, appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Gagan
Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for
respondents No. 2 to 6.
Mr. Singh submits that the petitioner was granted prospecting
license in terms of Section 4 of the Mines and Minerals
(Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short, 'Act of 1957') and
the said prospecting license is still subsisting. It is submitted by
him that under Section 10-A of the Act of 1957, the petitioner has
certain vested rights in respect of the subject matter of the license
and despite the said position, a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dated
09.12.2022 has been issued for auctioning Pandripani Iron Ore
Block which is the subject matter of the license in question. He has
submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court has passed
interim order, amongst others, in Writ Petition (C) No. 3696 of 2021
and he has drawn our attention to the order dated 06.10.2021
passed in the aforesaid case. Accordingly, he submits that an
interim order may be passed staying the NIT.
Mr. Tiwari submits that in view of the decision rendered by the
Karnataka High Court in Indocil Silicons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of
India & Others along with other connected cases (judgment dated
27.05.2022), the case of the petitioner would not come within the
ambit of pending cases under proviso to Section 10-A (2) (b) of the
Act of 1957.
It is, however, pointed out by Mr. Singh that the aforesaid
judgment was assailed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 15692 of 2022 and by an order
dated 02.11.2022, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed the
parties to maintain status-quo as existed on 02.11.2022.
Issue notice, returnable on 28.03.2023.
No formal steps are called for with regard to the respondents as
they are duly represented.
Till the next date fixed, though tenders in respect of Pandripani
Iron Ore Block may be accepted, the same shall not be opened.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Rajani Dubey)
Chief Justice Judge
Brijmohan
