JUDGEMENT
K.S Hegde, J. -
(1.) In this appeal by certificate the question for decision is whether the High Court of Patna was correct in its conclusion that the notification No. S. O. 2991 issued by the Union Government on October 9, 1963 under S. 4(1) of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, (No. 20 of 1957) - hereinafter called " the Act" - is violative of sub-s. (4) of that section.
"4 (1) Whenever it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from land in any locality, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, give notice of its intention to prospect or coal therein.
(2) **********
(3) **********
(4) In issuing a notification under this section, the Central Government shall exclude therefrom that portion of any land in which coal mining operations are actually being carried on in conformity with the provisions of any enactment, rule or order for the time being in force or any premises on which any process ancillary to the getting, dressing or preparation for sale of coal obtained as a result of such operations is being carried on are situate."
(2.) The facts of the case fall within a narrow compass. The respondent, Khas Karanpura Colliery Limited, took on lease 1401 bighas of land in mouza Sale in the district of Hazaribagh as per a registered lease deed of July 8, 1949, for the purpose of winning coal. Thereafter it commenced working the colliery in 1952. Certain seams were opened up. Electric transmission lines were put up, staff quarters, office quarters, houses for labourers, hospital, school etc. were built. For the purpose of dispatching the coal, a separate railway track was constructed and a railway siding built These works were completed long before the impugned notification was issued. Under the notification in question 1200 bighas of land were notified with a view to acquisition, which included areas on which the railway siding, staff quarters, boiler house, houses labourers etc. were constructed.
(3.) The respondent challenged the validity of the said notification in MJC No:643 of 1964 - an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution - before the High Court. The main contention taken in the writ petition was that the notification in question contravenes subs. (4) of S. 4. The High Court accepted that contention and quashed the notification.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.