V.K. Jhanji, J. - (1.) THIS order of mine shall dispose of Civil Writ Petitions No. 762, 1068, 2791, 3560 of 1998, 8309, 14725, 18112 and 18113 of 1999. All these writ petitions are being disposed of together as they pertain to the grant of mining leases and also contain same question of law and facts.
(2.) IN brief, the facts are that the State Government, as required by Clause (e) of Sub -rule (1) of Rule 59 of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 1960 Rules) issued 6 notifications dated 14.8.1992 and invited applications for the grant of mining leases for extraction of Silica Sand and Associated Ordinary sand at Village Jalalpur Sohna (1798 Kanals 11 Marias), Gangani (1824 Kanals 19 Marias), Mohmadpur Ahir) 1857 Kanals 0 Maria), Kharak Sohna (2866 Kanals 07 Marias), Lohinga Kalan (1183 Kanals 02 Maria) and Nurpur (223 Kanals 04 Maria) District Gurgaon. According to the notifications, applications were to be submitted after the expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of notification in the official gazette. 14th of September, 1992 was the first date for receipt of applications . In all , 144 applications were received. The break -up is given as under - JUDGEMENT_118_LAWS(P&H)7_2001.htm 3. The State Government constituted a Committee consisting of Director, Mines and Geology as its Chairman, Under Secretary (Industries), Haryana, State Mining Engineer and Mining Officer, Gurgaon to adjudge the suitability of applications. It interviewed the applications on 7.10.1992 and 8.10.1992. The Committee recommended to the State Government that the following candidates be granted mining lease for extraction of Silica Sand and associated ordinary Sand: JUDGEMENT_118_LAWS(P&H)7_20011.htm] 4. The State Government accepted the recommendation of the Committee and directed issuance of letter of intent to the successful applicants for the grant of mining lease for a period of 10 years. Thereafter, the State Government granted lease to the successful applicants by way of 2 separate lease deeds in each case i.e. one for silica sand and the other for associated ordinary sand. Some of the applicants whose applications for grant of mining lease were rejected, filed revision petitions under Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (for short the Act) read with Rule 55 of the Rules before the Revisional Authority comprising of Joint Secretary (Law) and Joint Secretary (Mines), Government of India. The Revisional Authority vide order dated 28.11.1997 set aside the orders rejecting the applications of revision Petitioners for grant of mining lease relating to Jalalpur Sohana, Mohmadpur Ahir and Gangani and further directed the State Government to consider and grant mining lease to the revision Petitioner, namely, Respondent No. 5 in CWP No. 762 of 1998, Respondent No. 3 in CWP No. 3560 of 1998 and Respondent No. 3 in CWP No. 1068 of 1998. Likewise, the Revisional Authority vide orders dated 23.8.1999 and 24.8.1999, set aside the lease relating to area situated in village Kharak Sohana and Nurpur granted to Ravinder Kumar who was none else but son of Amir Chand Makkar, the then sitting M.L.A. and M/s. Juneja & Company (Petitioners in CW Ps No. 14725 and 18112 of 1999 respectively) and remanded the case to the State Government for considering the applications of all the applicants afresh and then grant lease. 5. Similarly, vide notification dated 1.5.1992 published in Haryana Government Gazette dated 5.5.1992, State Government invited applications for grant of mining lease in village Rozika Gujjar in District Gurgaon for silica sand and associated ordinary sand. The Committee constituted for the purpose of adjudging the suitability of applicants interviewed 14 applicants who had applied in response to the notification. Out of 14, 12 applicants appeared and after interviewing them, the Committee recommended that the mining lease be granted to M/s Shivjit Singh Ugarsain. One of the applicants whose application had been rejected, filed revision petition under Section 30 of the Act before the Revisional Authority. The Revisional Authority vide order dated 28.11.1997 set aside the lease in favour of M/s. Shivjit Singh Ugarsain and directed the State Government to consider and grant the mining lease to the revision Petitioner, namely, Respondent No. 3 in Civil Writ petition No. 2791 of 1999. 6. In all the writ petitions, challenge is to order of the Revisional Authority whereby it has set aside the order rejecting the applications of the revision Petitioners and consequent order granting lease to the writ Petitioners.
(5.) LEARNED Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners contended that the Revisional Authority has acted illegally in allowing the revision petitions by arriving at a conclusion that there has been violation of the provisions of Sub -sections (2) and (3) of Section 11 of the Act and Rule 26 of the 1960 Rules. Learned Counsel contended that the State Government had constituted an expert committee for the purpose of granting lease in question and the said Committee was headed by Director, Mines and Geology. It had examined the matter in extenso and made recommendations for the purpose of granting lease. Learned Counsel further contended that the Revisional Authority was not competent to re -appraise the entire evidence and recommendation of the Committee and take afresh evidence but was only to ascertain that there was no gross violation of any statutory provision of law. The contention was that the Revisional Authority had exceeded its jurisdiction in concluding that the order of the State Government was non speaking order and without application of mind.;