CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx Amberkar IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11326 OF 2018 M/s. Kedar Mines & Minerals .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents ....................  Mr. Suresh M. Sabrad, Advocate for Petitioner  Mr. S.H. Kankal, AGP for Respondents ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JUNE 30, 2025 P. C. : 1. The challenge in the present Petition is to the order dated 21.02.2014 passed by Principal Secretary (Industries) Government of Maharashtra, Industries and Labour Department which is appended at page Nos. 99-101 of Petition. By virtue of the said order in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short "the said Act"), 77 Applications received for grant of prospecting license or mining lease over an area of 146.64 ha. notified vide notification dated 17.11.2011 including the Application of Petitioner was rejected for the reasons stated in the said order. Being aggrieved, Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 1 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx 2. I have heard Mr. Sabrad, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Mr. Kankal, learned AGP for Respondents and with their able assistance, perused the record of the case. Insofar as the facts in the present case are concerned, they are undisputed. However in the changes circumstances and further developments after due consideration the State Government has passed the impugned order which is the subject matter of challenge in the present Petition. 3. There is precursor to passing of the impugned order which is relevant for consideration for determination of present Petition. State Government invited Applications for grant of prospecting license for mineral bauxite through notification dated 17.11.2011 over an area of 146.64 ha. comprising Gat Nos, 44, 45 and 46 in Village Yelwanjugai, Taluka Shahuwadi, Dist. Kolhapur. Applications were invited within 30 days from publication of notification under second proviso of sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the said Act. Seven Applications were received prior to issuance of said notification whereas in response to the notification further 70 Applications were received including the Application filed by Petitioner dated 30.11.2010. The District Mining Officer Kolhapur followed the prescribed procedure and forwarded all Applications received to the Director Geology and Mining Maharashtra for scrutiny and further necessary action. The Director Geology and Mining after due scrutiny 2 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx forwarded proposal containing 65 Applications for further necessary action to the Government vide letter dated 15.10.2013. In view of the delay in allotment, Petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 4264/2013 with a grievance that its Application for prospecting license was not decided since 2011 by the State Government. This Court by order dated 20.11.2013 directed the State Government to decide the said Application of Petitioner on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 3 months. In pursuant of the said order dated 20.11.2013 passed by this Court, State Government decided to consider all Applications received for grant of prospecting license over the notified area admeasuring 146.64 ha. in Village Yelwanjugai, Taluka Shahuwadi, Dist. Kolhapur accordingly. After due consideration and for the reasons stated in the order dated 21.02.2014, the State Government in exercise of its powers conferred under sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the said Act rejected all Applications received for grant of prospecting license or mining lease not on their merits but on the following grounds:- (a) As par para 4.3 of the guidelines issued by the Central Government dated 24.06.2009 it was mandated that the details indicating proven / probable reserves as per United Nations Framework Classification (UNFC) and grade of ore was required to be known for grant of mining lease; 3 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx (b) As per guidelines for adoption of UNFC, it was stipulated that intensity of field work to be carried out for proving the mineral deposit on the scale of 1:1:1 on three axis i.e. Geological axis, Feasibility axis and Economic axis respectively was not done / available; (c) Considering the requirements of UNFC, the Government felt that it would be appropriate and economical if the prospecting is done on a larger scale for whole of the bauxite plateaus rather restricting it to the singular notified area in Village Yelwanjugai, Taluka Shahuwadi, Dist. Kolhapur; (d) In order to achieve the accurate reserves and in the interest of scientific development of the mineral (bauxite) the State Government intended to carry out prospecting of bauxite mineral itself through the Director Geology and Mining Maharashtra; (e) In view of the above reasons, it was felt by Government that it would not be prudent to consider any of the Applications received from private parties / entities / companies for grant of prospecting license for mineral (bauxite) on merits under the said Act over the singular 4 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx notified area and even under Rule 12 of the Mineral Concession Rules 1960, the exercise of affording an opportunity of hearing to all Applicants was ruled out; (f) Thus in view of the above changed scenario, the Government by the impugned order concluded that the area under consideration was no more available for grant of mineral concession. Hence, all 77 Applications received including the Application of Petitioner were held liable for rejection. 4. From the above, it is seen that the Government has taken a conscious decision in exercise of its powers conferred under Sub- section 3 of Section 10 of the said Act to reject all 76 Applications which were received for grant of prospecting license for the purpose of a mining lease over the notified area. Admittedly Applications are not rejected on merits. Decision of the Government is based upon adoption of guidelines of United Nations Framework Classification which stipulate the intensity of filed work to be carried out for proving existence of the deposits on the scale of 1:1:1 on the three axis i.e. Geological axis, Feasibility axis and Economic axis and most importantly on the ground that prospecting of bauxite shall be undertaken not only in respect of the notified area of 146.64 Hector in 5 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx Village Yelwanjugai, Taluka Shahuwadi, Dist. Kolhapur but on a larger scale in respect of the whole of the bauxite plateaus. 5. That apart, Government has taken a conscious decision that prospecting work of mining mineral bauxite shall be undertaken by the Government itself through the Director Geology and Mining Maharashtra. Though Mr. Sabrad in the course of his submissions has vehemently submit that very recently Government has renewed the mining lease in favour of M/s. Hindalco Industries upto the year 2030 and therefore as it cannot lie in the mouth of the Government to now argue that the Government is withdrawing from the ground of prospecting license over the notified area. 6. In that regard, it is prima facie seen that grant of mining license/prospecting license granted to M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited is in not respect of the notified area rather it is in respect of a different location / village and further it is not in respect of the notification issued which is subject matter of the present case. In so far as the present issue at hand is concerned, Government has taken a conscious decision that the entire notified area which is the subject matter of Notification dated 17.11.2011 admeasuring 146.64 Hector is withdrawn. Application for prospecting license for this area were received from 77 Applicants. Their names and details are appended at page No.95 of the Petition. Name of the Petitioner is appended at Sr. 6 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx No.6 in the same list of prospecting license. The name of M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited also appears at Sr. No.38 in the said list. 7. It is seen that the 77 Applicants including the Petitioner and others all applied in response to the Notification dated 17.11.2011. It is seen that District Mining Officer after following the prescribed procedure forwarded their Applications to the Director Geology and Mining Maharashtra for further necessary action. 8. In that regard, Government has taken a conscious decision which is contained in the order dated 21.02.2014. Mining of bauxite mineral undoubtedly on the basis of the record placed before the Court depends upon several issues and technicalities. There are various guidelines issued by the Central Government which mandate compliance of the details indicating the proven/probable reasons as per the United Nations Framework Classification and it is also required to ascertain the grade of the ore (mineral) before grant of mining lease of bauxite mineral. 9. In that view of the matter, after considering the issue, the State Government has passed the order dated 21.02.2014. Petitioner being one of the 77 Applicants cannot as matter of right seek a mandamus against the Government for a mining lease to be given to the Petitioner. Merely on the making of an Application pursuant to the 7 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx Notification dated 17.11.2011, no substantive right has accrued to the Petitioner, lest Petitioner can persuade the Court to issue a mandamus against the Government. This is primarily because a conscious decision has been taken by the Government in view of the reasons which are alluded to herein above. 10. Once those reasons are prima facie seen, this Court cannot usurp the power of the Government to decide on allotment of mining lease and carve out an exception in favour of the Petitioner. Conscious decision of the Government as reflected shows that no discrimination has been committed by the Government whatsoever to enable the Petitioner to approach this Court for a writ of mandamus. 11. By virtue of the impugned order, the Government has decided that henceforth in respect of the entire notified area the Government after undertaking the exercise as per the guidelines of the United Nations Framework Classification intended to carry out the prospecting itself through the Director Geology and Mining Maharashtra. Petitioner has referred to several orders passed by the Government, inter alia, with respect to grant of mining lease as appended to the Petition. Prima facie when those orders are read and seen, it is seen that they pertain to different gat numbers and not the notified area which is the subject matter of Notification dated 17.11.2011. If a mining lease is already given, the same will be 8 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx governed by the rules and covenants therein. Such is not the present case. 12. The above submission made by the Petitioner that several mining leases have been renewed by the Government subsequently cannot be acceptable or relevant in the present case. Copy of one such renewed of lease order is appended at page No.131 of the Petition. However, perusal of the same shows that extension of mining lease is given to M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited therein is not in respect of the notified area but certain other area in District Kolhapur, Tahsil Chandgad, Villages Bhogoli, Pilani, Kokare, Umgaon, Nhaveli and Chandgad wherein a previous lease existed. That apart, said extension order prima facie shows that the same is with respect to mining of aluminum and not with respect to bauxite. The technical specifications and reasons stated in the impugned order dated 21.02.2014 are required to be considered and if the State Government is of the opinion that the same are required to be adhered to and it would be appropriate and economical if the prospecting of mineral bauxite is done on a larger scale for the whole of the bauxite plateaus without restricting it to one area only, this Court does not find in anything incongruous or incorrect in such a stand taken by the Government. For all the above reasons, Petition fails. 9 of 10 CIVIL WP 11326-18.docx 13. Needless to state that Petitioner is at liberty to apply for mining lease as and when the Government issues Notification for grant of prospecting license for minerals in accordance with law. 14. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.02.2014 passed by the Principal Secretary (Industries) Government of Maharashtra is upheld. 15. Writ Petition is dismissed. Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 10 of 10 RAVINDRA MOHAN AMBERKAR Digitally signed by RAVINDRA MOHAN AMBERKAR Date: 2025.06.30 12:23:28 +0530