IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 47 of 2024 M/s Mineral India, a partnership concern through its partner Mantu Kumar Yadav, aged about 58 years, S/o late Sahdev Prasad Yadav, R/o Malpur, Prahladpur, P.O. and P.S. Ghoswadi, Dist- Patna, Bihar- 803212. ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology officiating from his office at Yojna Bhawan, Nepal House, Doranda, Dist- Ranchi- 834002. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, officiating from his office at Collectorate Building, Stadium Road, P.O. and P.S. Sahibganj, Dist- Sahibganj 3. The District Mining Officer, Sahibganj, officiating from his office at District Mining Officer, Near Collectorate Building, Stadium Road, P.O and P.S. Sahibganj, Dist- Sahibganj. ... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate Mr. Parth Jalan, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Jai Prakash, A.A.G.-I A --------- 06/Dated: 25.03.2025 M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.(Oral) 1. In the instant case, admittedly the mining lease of the petitioner has been terminated on 27.09.2023 by the 2nd respondent purporting to exercise the power conferred on the State Government under Rule 22(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, in spite of the fact that there was no delegation to the said official by the State Government under Section 26(2) of the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 of its power to terminate leases. Page 2 of 2 2. Such a view has been taken by Division Bench of this Court on 06.02.2025 in W.P. (C) No. 88 of 2024. 3. Though counsel for the respondents seeks to contend that under Clause 5 of the Lease Agreement, such a power is vested with the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, it is settled law that if there is conflict between the statute and the contract, the statute will prevail and if the statute confers such a power only on the State Government and such power is not delegated to the Deputy Commissioner, he cannot exercise power under the Lease Agreement and prematurely terminate the lease granted to the petitioner. 4. Therefore, it is declared that the order dt. 08.09.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, is wholly without jurisdiction, but since the lease agreement itself ended on 27.01.2025, the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the appropriate forum to claim damages for illegal termination of lease from the respondents. 5. Writ petition is disposed of. 6. All pending interlocutory applications shall stand disposed off. (M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) Manoj/ Pramanik/Cp.2