S TAMILARASI Vs. M P RAM MOHAN RAJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner had applied to the State Government in Industries Department on 2.2.1996 under rule 39 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as - the Ruels- ) for grant of quarry lease for quarrying jelly and rough stone for a period of 20 years from the poramboke lands over an extent of 3.64 hectares in survey No.782/2 and over an extent of 2.36 hectares in survey No.777/4A of Ayyamkollankondam Village, Rajapalayam Taluk, Kamarajar District. Rule 39 of the Rules conferred power on State Government to grant or renew quarry lease or permission in special cases. THE validity of the said rule was upheld in Premium Granites Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (1994) 2 SCC 691. THE Supreme Court, however, made it clear that although a lease granted in exercise of power under rule 39 cannot per se be held invalid, whether the exercise of power under rule 39 in a given case has been properly made or not can always be questioned and if such a question is raised in a case, it will be open to the High Court to decide the question on merits. In the wake of the Supreme Court judgment in a batch of writ petitions viz., Writ Petition No.19868 of 1994, etc. batch this Court vide order dated 17.03.1995 directed the Government to dispose of the applications filed under rule 39 within twelve weeks from the date of the judgment.

(2.) THE petitioner herein approached this Court in W.P.No.6931 of 1996 making grievance that his application under rule 39 was not disposed of and prayed for a direction to the Government to dispose of his application made under rule 39. By order dated 14.06.1996 passed on the said writ petition this Court directed the Government to consider the application of the petitioner and dispose of the same within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and also directed the Government to maintain status quo in the meanwhile. However, on 27.06.1996 i.e., within a period of four weeks rule 39 itself was repealed by the Government. Consequently, the application of the petitioner came to be rejected vide order dated 08.10.1996. Subsequently, the District Collector put certain lands for auction in 2003. One of the two lands for which the application was made by the petitioner was also put to auction. At that stage, nearly after seven years, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking certiorarified mandamus to quash the order dated 08.10.1996 and to direct the first respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 02.02.1996 for the grant of lease for quarrying jelly and rough stone under rule 39 of the Rules.

(3.) IN P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of INdia, (1996) 5 SCC 268 the petitioners, who were exporters of ready-made garments, challenged the change in policy by way of writ petition inter alia on the ground that the Government had promised to grant - MEE- and - NQE- quotas for those who update their quality of products by purchasing new machines after expiry of 5 years life span or given promise that all those who performed their applications - MEE- were entitled to - NQE- quota and that, therefore, the respondents were estopped to resile from the promise made to them and they could not act in a way detrimental to their legitimate expectations. A three Judge bench of the Supreme Court negatived this challenge by holding as follows:-