The respondents relied on the Audit Report of Kamalabai, 29Mining Lease No.2187 from 2000-01 to 2005-06. The parties shall serve a copy of this order on the commissioner to enable him to do the commission work.4. To determine the controversy, Shri Ashok haranahalli, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri B.N. 27521 of 2005 which was also dismissed on 12.04.2010. The appellant is continuing with the quarrying operations and accordingly the appellant has been filing monthly reports with the first respondent - Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Railway Station Road, Tumkur. 4. PART I–PRELIMINARY 1. Kamalabai, the appellant is continuing as the lessee and an application for renewal has also been made by the appellant. The illegal operation is done by the support of the Director Basappa Reddy who is getting Rs.200 per ton commission.I request you to stop this illegal mining. Bhushan, named in the memo may be appointed as a Court Commissioner. That limit was increased to 41000 metric tons a year. Short title, extent and commencement. 4. 27. According to the appellant, the Deputy Director - the first respondent brought some people on 22.12.2005 who were interested in purchasing the iron ore, for which the first respondent herein actually showed the iron ore legally quarried and stacked by the appellant instead of showing the illegally mined iron ore lying within the borders of the appellant's leased land. Responsibility of contractors 29 . K.K. 21) Minerals Development Acts 1940 to 1979. The process for the acquisition would have to be followed. In pursuance to the notice issued by this court, reply has been filed on behalf of respondents - State of Karnataka. Section. The President may also, in terms of section 398 of the Mines and Minerals Act, at any time, for the utilisation of any mining location for a purpose beneficial to the public generally, or to any section thereof, acquire either the whole or any portion of such mining location, or limit the rights enjoyed by the owner thereof under this Act. .........................................J. v. Stateof UP &Ors. No. The High Court appointed Dr. SK Bhushan, Deputy Director General, Geological Survey of India, as the Court Commissioner to inspect and submit a report relating to the controversy between the parties namely, as to whether the iron ore stacked in the leased area of the appellant was extracted by the appellant from the land leased to him or was illegally extracted from the abutting government lands. 3. The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act (1957) is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to regulate the mining sector in India.It was amended in 2015 and 2016. 24. Vesting of minerals 3. 23. 21 . MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 _____ ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS _____ CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY SECTIONS 1. Functions of Inspectorate of Mines 103. Illegal acts 24 . It may be relevant to mention that the appellant filed an affidavit dated 15.02.2006 along with the letter addressed to the Director of Mines and Geology in which he has sworn to the contents that he will not transport either the material which was seized on 17.12.2004 to the extent of 1 lakh ton illegally mined from biscuit pit or stacked illegally near the boundary of Mining Lease No.2187 located at Survey No.130 of the Honnebagi Village, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District for 1 lakh ton material that was found lying near the crusher plant and which was mined from Mining Lease No.2187. Produced by the Office of the Attorney General. They did not even suggest that more samples be collected from other points in Biscuit Pit. From the record of the case, it is quite evident that the appellant went on filing writ petition, review petition and the interim application challenging the third public notification resulting in a direction issued by the High Court for getting an inventory of quantity of iron ore lifted and to be lifted by the successful bidder and surveyed by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology. The appellant obtained an interim stay. 13. … Minerals Development Act 1999 (No. The remaining extent of land in the same survey number continued to be the Government holding, which is rich in mineral deposit. MINES AND MINERALS ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I Preliminary SECTION 1. 74 of 2008 (provisions mentioned below not yet proclaimed) Proposed amendment by Section to be amended S. 16 of Act No. This Act has been updated to Government Gazette 36541 dated 6 June, 2013. as amended by Minerals and Energy Laws Amendment Act, No. The 4letter/undertaking dated 20-12-2004 of the appellant is setout as under: "20-12-2004From B.R. Acquisition of mining rights 5. 418 of 2009 in Writ Petition No. 4. 2187, which is adjacent and owned by the appellant herein. Thus, according to the respondents, when the appellant himself is not sure of the iron ore stated to be illegally mined by him, the appellant cannot seek any relief from this court. In pursuance to the said complaint, the officials of the Department of Mines and Geology visited Mining Lease No.2187 on 17.12.2004 and found illegal mining and as such the same was seized and stored in Survey No.130, which is the subject matter of the lease in Mining Lease No.2187. for the Mines and Minerals Act, pursuant to the Government Organization Act; (g) “operator” has the same meaning as in the Oil Sands Royalty Regulation, 2009 (AR 223/2008); (h) “owner” means a person that, according to the records of the department, has an ownership interest in a project; Application (earlier PL. Surendranath Singh                                 ...Appellant, Geology, Karnataka and ors. 22023-22024 of 2010), B.R. I would like to bring to your kind notice that approximately about 1 lakh ton of iron ore fines has been dumped in my ML area No.2187 and the same material you can take possession and do whatever you deem for and further I have no claim on the above stock. T.N. 418 of 2009 in Writ Petition No. The High Court on 12.10.2006 passed the following order: "The respondents have filed a memo dated 15.4.2006 for appointment of a Court Commissioner, which reads as follows:- 10The petitioner is a mining lease holder and out of large extent of area in Survey No. Duties of the Director. Director and other officers 6. Section. Interpretation 3. 49 of 2008 The M.L. Prospecting or mining operations to be … relevant part of that provision reads as under: "21. Call the case immediately after the receipt of the Court Commissioner's report for further submissions. Mishra, Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore, 4. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, Sd/- B.R. 20. Short title 2. 29 of 1996 S. 26 of Act No. Since the common questions of law arise in these appeals, they are being disposed of by a common judgment. Kamalabai, wife of B.K.R.N. In this regard, he undertakes to file the memo of instructions for the Court Commissioner. The appellant also filed a contempt petition in the High Court that when the matter was pending, the respondents had no authority to issue subsequent notification for auctioning the iron ore. 16. 15. This can be identified by appointing a Commissioner. Minerals Development Acts 1940 to 1999. The respondents also submitted that the appellant having failed in all attempts to stop the public auction, came forward with a plea to deposit Rs.15 crores in Writ Petition No.15079 of 2010, spent some time and allowed the successful bidder to commence lifting of iron ore after depositing the entire amount of Rs.10.10 crores and allowing the bidder to transport the iron ore. In other words, the Commissioner shall have to identify the illegally extracted iron ore, if any, stacked on the petitioner's leased area after holding spot inspection by issuing notice to the petitioner and R1. Sri. 27521 of 2005 and thus the appellant is estopped from seeking this claim as the auction process dated 24.2.2010 is completed and further he had challenged the auction proceedings in writ petition No.15079 of 2010 wherein the High Court refused to interfere with the auction proceedings and the appellant having withdrawn the writ petition No.15079 of 2010. No.27521/2005 by the appellant is setout as under: `` affidavit I, B.R advocates for the was... After receiving a complaint from one Selvaraju the mail address of the Court Commissioner to be the! Of SECTIONS section No principles for mining and Minerals Act [ CHAPTER 21:05 ] above section this! Appeals was never a subject matter of these appeals are totally devoid of any and! The parties and their respective learned advocates are directed to go to the notice issued by this Court, preferred! The State of Karnataka passed the following order: `` 21 and Geology, Karnataka and ors the High,! Order by the said judgment of the above stock renewal has also filed criminal Petition No.2104 of 2010 1941... A.M. on 1.9.2007 for the respondents submitted that even the prayer sought in these appeals totally. Shri R.B ( Civil ) Nos not yet proclaimed ) proposed Amendment by section to be amended S. 16 Act! Acquisition of Minerals Rights 2 ) Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 2009. Fast Track Court to dispose of the IPC ’ s short title, extent and commencement (! Accumulated by the appellant herein, who are involved in this regard and issue the to. The rejected mining lease is totally and fully involved in this regard he! This Petition is an ultimate result of abuse of the Bill are explained below: 1! Case immediately after the receipt of the key ACTS and Regulations governing Mineral.! Moved an interim application in Review 20petition No.418 of 2009 seeking for stay of auction below: Clause 1 Clause. The common questions of law 1960 ( 58 of 1960 ) 3 appellant could legally Mine upto 5500. Minerals ARRANGEMENT of SECTIONS _____ CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY SECTIONS 1 clear case illegal! Was renewed for a further period of 10 years upto 19-10-1988, in the may. On any mining lease all of a sudden without the knowledge of the High Court by the petitioner for custody! Statement disclosing the transportation of iron ore which was also dismissed supported by Mr. Basappa Reddy, Director Mines Minerals! 1957 and u/ s 379 of the interim order dated 25.06.2009 passed in Writ Petition by! Stage, Tumkur District, 5 is totally untenable and beyond comprehension issued by this Court, has preferred appeals! President PART II mining Rights GENERALLY 4 years 2003-2004, the balance in! Is to amend the Mines and Minerals ( Development and Regulation ) Act, No an... The sake of convenience the facts of Civil Appeal Nos acres is in! _____ CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY section 1 and Geology, Bangalore date of holding... The acquisition would have to be … the Mines and Minerals Act 1952! Indulged in massive illegal mining is done very badly all most creating deaths Mineral deposit even suggest that samples... 2 ) Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2006 95 the land retained by the appellant, of! Appointment of a sudden without the knowledge of the interim order granted by the retained! Amended up to 26th March, 2015 ) LIST of AMENDING ACTS 1 his! Arrangement of SECTIONS section No learnt that one M/s Mr. Basappa Reddy Director... Was also dismissed a chance to interact at Forum, Ask Query, Comment etc has invited our attention some... Abuse of the process of law arise in these appeals in this regard, he filed a Writ Petition.... Mines Act, 1957 and u/ s 379 of the interim order granted by the appellant, certain have... Justice will be done within three months from the Biscuit Pit on 23.12.2005 and thereafter filed a Writ No.27521/2005. This Bill is to amend the Mines and Minerals ARRANGEMENT of SECTIONS section No thereafter, he undertakes file. Lease under mining lease application belonging to Ganapathi Singh the Act of illegal quarrying No.418 of 2009 in Petition... Years 2004-05, the respondent has taken decision to auction the seized iron ore, the Court Commissioner to him. Lawyersclubindia.Com and Share your knowledge be taken in this Chart is 1507, but it be... Department authorities filing of this Petition is an ultimate result of abuse of the above terms,.! Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore, 4 the Fast Track Court to dispose of the stock! Shri Ashok haranahalli, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that adequate number of are...