- (1.) The present writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs:- A. For issuance of an appropriate writ and/or writs of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 1 to 7 to declare that the application of petitioner No.1 for grant of prospecting license for mining the Ankua Iron Ore Mines has been made on 20th March 2007 and not on 28th March 2007. B. For issuance of an appropriate writ and/or writs or and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 1 to 7 to declare that the application of petitioner No. 1 for grant of prospecting license for mining the Ankua Iron Ore Mines has been made within time and for a direction upon the said respondents to consider and allow the same. C. For issuance of an appropriate writ and/or writs of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 3 to 7 to recommend the case of petitioner No. 1 to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for grant of prospecting lease for mining the Ankua Iron Ore Mines. D. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to grant prospecting license to petitioner No. 1 for mining the Ankua Iron Ore Mines. E. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs of and/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 1 to 7 to treat all applicants for grant of prospecting license in respect of Ankua Iron Ore Mines equally and without any discrimination. F. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs of and/or in the nature of Prohibition restraining the respondent Nos. 1 to 7 from permitting respondent Nos. 8, 9 and 10 to carry on any mining activities of any nature whatsoever at the Ankua Iron Ore Mines. G. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs of and / or in the nature of Prohibition restraining respondent Nps. 1 to 7 from giving any effect or further effect to the decision taken to award any prospecting license in favour of respondent Nos. 8, 9 and 10 in respect of the Ankua Iron Ore Mines. H. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs of and / or in the nature of Prohibition restraining respondent Nos. 8, 9 and 10 from acting upon and / or in furtherance of any prospecting license granted in favour of respondent Nos. 8, 9 and 10 for mining the Ankua Iron Ore Mines. I. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs of and / or in the nature of Certiorari commanding respondent Nos. 1 to 7 to certify and produce all necessary documents before this Hon'ble Court so that conscionable justice may be done upon perusal thereof.
(2.) Before dealing with the merits of the matter and the facts of the case it is necessary to bring on record the details of the respondents arrayed in the present writ petition as there has been subsequent impleadment as well as deletion from time to time. Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 is Union of India whereas respondent Nos. 3 to 7 represents the State of Jharkhand. Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 are the private respondents namely Tata Steel Limited, M/s. Jindal Steel Limited and M/s. Essar Steel (Jharkhand) Ltd. respectively. Subsequently M/s. JSW Steel Limited preferred an LA. No. 3031 of 2007 for intervention and they were added as respondent No. 11. However, in reply to the I.A. the petitioner made a categorical statement that no relief has been claimed against them and they are not the contesting parties and thus they can be deleted. The matter came up for hearing on 3.9.2008 and the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Joy Saha made an oral prayer to delete Respondent No. 9 also. An order was passed deleting the name of respondent No. 10 from the memo of parties and the second I.A.No. 1935 of 2008 was accordingly disposed of. Likewise today the counsel for the petitioner in view of its own affidavit in reply to the I.A. No. 3031 of 2007 preferred by JSW Steel Limited prays to delete them from the array of respondent as no relief has been claimed against them. Considering the aforesaid facts, respondent No. 11 and respondent No. 9 as prayed for are also deleted. Thus the only contesting private respondent left is M/s. Tata Steel Limited as respondent No. 8.
(3.) The facts in brief are set out as under: - In the instant case there is a serious dispute with regard to the date on which petitioner No. 1 applied for grant of prospecting license for mining the Ankua Iron Ore Mines and accordingly a declaration has been sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus to declare that the application of petitioner No. 1 for prospecting license has been made on 28th March, 2007 and not on 28th March, 2007.;