9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the industrial effluent known as 'slurry' flowing from a colliery washery is 'coal' under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. 2. Whether 'slurry' is otherwise a mineral within the meaning of the said Act. 3. Whether the collection of slurry from the soil constitutes a mining operation. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Whether slurry is coal under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 The court examined whether slurry, an industrial effluent from coal washeries, can be considered 'coal' under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. The petitioners argued that slurry, being a by-product of coal washing, should be classified as coal. However, the court found that slurry is a residual waste product consisting of mud, oily substances, water, and fine particles of coal, which cannot be equated with coal itself. The court emphasized that slurry is an industrial effluent and not coal, stating, "Slurry and sludge, therefore, cannot be raised to the pedestal of being coal itself for the processing of which they are the consequential wastes." Issue 2: Whether slurry is otherwise a mineral within the meaning of the Act The court explored if slurry could be classified as a mineral under the Act. It noted that the term 'mineral' is not precisely defined in the Act but generally refers to substances extracted from the earth. The court observed that slurry, being an industrial waste product, does not originate from a natural deposit or a mining process. The court concluded that slurry does not meet the basic criteria of a mineral, stating, "Slurry is consequently a residual or a waste product or at the highest a by-product of this chemical process... intrinsically to label this industrial effluent as coal itself would, indeed, be far-fetched, if not absurd." Issue 3: Whether the collection of slurry from the soil constitutes a mining operation The court examined whether collecting slurry from the soil could be considered a mining operation. It noted that mining operations involve extracting minerals from the earth, either through deep mining or surface collection of natural deposits. Since slurry is an artificial deposit resulting from industrial processes, its collection does not constitute a mining operation. The court stated, "The mere collection of sludge or slurry from a place where it may get deposited artificially or is dumped cannot possibly be equated with the winning of a mineral under the Act." Conclusion: 1. Slurry is not coal: The court concluded that slurry is not coal and thus does not fall within the ambit of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. The terms 'coal' and 'slurry' are not identical or interchangeable. 2. Slurry is not a mineral: The court held that slurry is not independently a mineral and is therefore outside the scope of the Act. 3. Collection of slurry is not a mining operation: The court determined that the collection of slurry from the soil does not constitute a mining operation. Overruled Judgment: The court overruled the previous Division Bench judgment in Keshri Mal Jain v. State of Bihar, AIR 1985 Pat 114, which had held that slurry is coal and thus a mineral. The court found that the earlier judgment did not correctly interpret the law and was based on an inadequate examination of the issues involved. Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, leaving the parties to seek their ordinary remedies under the law, emphasizing that the issues presented involved disputed questions of fact that could not be resolved within the writ jurisdiction.
|
