Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) The instant application preferred by the respondent State of Jharkhand seeks modification / clarification of the order dated 07.11.2014 passed by this Court to the extent, as is quoted here-under: "Having considered the rival submission of the parties on the aforesaid issues, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents are not justified in taking an objection to the consent submitted by the petitioner by using expression "without prejudice to our rights under the law". The conditions imposed by the respondent-State for execution of mining lease are supposed to be in conformity with the law, the MMDR act and rules framed thereunder and also the larger scheme of constitutional provisions. Whether or not such conditions do lie within the legal framework may be subject matter of adjudication upon being raised by the person aggrieved"
(2.) Learned Senior Counsel Mr. M. L. Verma, while seeking modification of the observations made in the aforesaid order, submitted that the conditions imposed by the State Government are in consonance with the law and report of the M.B. Shah Commission and the petitioner does not have a reason to question the same. Petitioner's consent in the manner it has been given, is not unconditional acceptance as required by the State Government. Reference has been made to certain averments made by the petitioner in the supplementary affidavit dated 05.11.2014, where it has stated that the conditions imposed by the State are illegal, contrary to law and without jurisdiction. Learned Senior counsel laboured to justify the conditions which are imposed. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that whether they say so in specific terms or not, their rights under the law are not going to be affected by the conditions imposed.
(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the consent letter is at Annexure-24 to the same supplementary affidavit dated 05.11.2014 and is dated 01.11.2014 where the expression used is wholly innocuous. It is submitted that the petitioner has given consent to the terms and conditions contained in the letter dated 20th October 2014 of the State Government, however, without prejudice to their rights under the law. No exception can be taken to use of such expression as the question whether the conditions are within the frame work of law or not, can only be adjudicated before the appropriate forum, if raised by an aggrieved person. Learned senior counsel also submitted that apart from the consent letter, the expression used in the said affidavit need not be attached much significance. The petitioner abides by the language used in the consent letter dated November, 1st, 2014.;