2012 (3) TMI 711 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Legality of the orders refusing renewal of stone quarry lease.
2. Applicability of Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004.
3. Government's right to auction minor mineral sources.
4. Petitioner's right to renewal of quarry lease.

Summary:

1. Legality of the Orders Refusing Renewal of Stone Quarry Lease:
The Petitioner challenged the orders dated 01.03.2011 and 30.04.2011, passed by the Tahasildar and Sub-Collector, respectively, which refused the renewal of the stone quarry lease. The Petitioner argued that these orders were "illegal, arbitrary & without application of mind & are contrary to the provisions of Rules, 2004."

2. Applicability of Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004:
The Petitioner contended that the quarry lease applied for renewal is not for any of the minerals mentioned in item 1(i) of Schedule-III under Chapter-VI of Rule 35 of the Rules, 2004, which is meant for auction. The Petitioner argued that the quarry lease should be renewed as per Chapter-IV of the Rules, 2004, which provides for long-term quarry leases.

3. Government's Right to Auction Minor Mineral Sources:
The Government's stance, supported by various letters and circulars, emphasized that "all the sources containing minor minerals should be settled through annual auction route only." The Court upheld this view, stating that "the best method of disposal of public property is by way of public auction & not by private negotiation" to ensure transparency and maximize revenue.

4. Petitioner's Right to Renewal of Quarry Lease:
The Court noted that "no person has any right of renewal of the Government property" and cited Supreme Court judgments emphasizing that public property should be disposed of via public auction to secure maximum benefit to the community. The Court found no illegality in the orders refusing the renewal of the lease and stated that the Petitioner could participate in the public auction.

Conclusion:
The Court directed that the application of the Petitioner may be considered by putting the sairat source to auction, allowing the Petitioner to participate. If the Petitioner matches the highest bid, preference should be given to him. The Writ Petition was allowed to the extent indicated, with the Court emphasizing the need for transparency and public interest in the disposal of public property.