Bhagwati, J. - (1.) The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) divides minerals into two classes, namely, minor minerals and minerals other than minor minerals, which may, for the sake of brevity, be referred to as major minerals. The Act itself makes provisions in Sections 4 to 13 for regulating the grant of prospecting licences and mining leases in respect of major minerals but so far as minor minerals are concerned, grant of prospecting licenses and mining leases is left to be governed by rules to be made by the State Government under Section 15. The Madhya Pradesh Government, in exercise of the power conferred under Section 15, made the Madhya Pradesh Minor Minerals Rules, 1961 for regulating the grant of quarry lease in respect of minor minerals and for purposes connected therewith. These rules are ex hypothesi applicable only in relation to grant of quarry lease in respect of minor minerals. "Minor minerals" are defined in Section 3 (e) to mean building stones, gravel, ordinary clay, ordinary sand other than sand used for prescribed purposes, and any other mineral which the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, declare to be a minor mineral. The Central Government, in exercise of the power conferred under Section 3 (e), issued a notification dated 1st June, 1958 declaring inter alia "limestones used for line burning" to be a minor mineral. This notification was subsequently amended by the Central Government by a further notification dated 20th September, l961 and the words "limestone used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material" were substituted for the words "limestone used for lime burning". The result was that with effect from 20th September, 1961 only limestone used in kilns for manufacture of lime used for building material remained a minor mineral while limestone used for burning for manufacture of lime for other purposes ceased to be a minor mineral and became a major mineral. The appellant was a lessee under a quarry lease of 25.32 acres of land situate in village Badari, Tehsil Kurwara, District Jabalpur granted to her by the State Government for quarrying "limestone for burning" for a period of five years from 21st June, 1961 to 20th June, 1966. This quarry lease was granted under the Madhya Pradesh Minor Minerals Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and it was in Form B annexed to the Rules and contained clause (15) giving an option of renewal to the appellant for a further term of five Years. Before the period of the quarry lease was due to expire, the appellant applied for renewal in accordance with the provisions of the Rules and in the application for renewal against column 6 of paragraph 3 the appellant described the mineral which she intended to mine as "limestone for burning". This application for renewal was not disposed of by the State Government before the expiry of the quarry lease and it was, therefore, deemed to have been refused under Rule 8 (3). The appellant thereupon made an application for review under Rule 28 and the State Government, by an order dated 24th December, 1966 made in exercise of the power conferred under Rule 29, sanctioned renewal of the quarry lease to the appellant. Pursuant to this order a quarry lease was granted by the State Government in favour of the appellant for quarrying "limestone for burning" for a period of five years from 21st June, 1966 to 20th June, 1971. This quarry lease was also in Form V annexed to the Rules but it did not contain clause (15) giving an option of renewal to the appellant.
(2.) Even though the last mentioned quarry lease granted to the appellant did not contain an option of renewal, the appellant made an application dated 19th June, 1970 to the State Government for renewal of the quarry lease which was due to expire on 20th June, 1971. This application was in Form I annexed to the Rules and against column 5 of paragraph 3, which required an applicant to state whether the application was for a fresh lease or for a renewal of a lease previously granted, the appellant stated that the application was for renewal of quarry lease. The application was, therefore, clearly and avowedly an application for renewal of the quarry lease which was subsisting in favour of the appellant and not an application for a fresh lease. Then again, what was stated by the appellant against column 6 of paragraph 3 is very material. The appellant stated there that the mineral which she intended to mine was "limestone for burning as a minor mineral". This application was not disposed of by the State Government before the expiry of the quarry lease and it was, therefore, deemed to have been refused on 20th June, 1971. The appellant thereupon filed an application for review on 1st July, 1971 under Rule 28.
(3.) Now, sometime after the application for renewal of the quarry lease was made by the appellant, respondent No. 5 made an application dated 11th September, 1970 for grant of a quarry lease in respect of the same area. This application was also in Form I annexed to the Rules and against column 6 of paragraph 3 it was stated that the mineral which the applicant intended to mine was "limestone used in kilns for manufacture of lime used as building material". The State Government failed to dispose of this application within one year from the date of its receipt and therefore under Rule 8 (2) it was teemed to have been refused on 10th September, 1971. Respondent No. 5 too had, in the circumstances, no choice but to file an application for review under Rule 28 on 11th September, 1971.;