- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Twenty First Century Wire Rods Ltd. v. Union Of India
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ndDAY OF JANUARY, 2017
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B. WRIT PETITION NO.63900 OF 2016 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN :
TWENTY FIRST CENTURY WIRE RODS LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
# 408, 12THMAIN,
SADASHIVANAGAR
RMV EXTN.,
BENGALOORU - 560 080
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR
VINOD GOEL ... PETITIONER
(BY MR.M.VINAYA KEERTHY, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF MINES
SHASTRI BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
1
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
& INDUSTRIES
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALOORU - 560 001.
3. DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES
& GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVAN,
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALOORU - 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY MR.K.M.NATARAJ,, ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL A/W SRI.K.A.ARIGA, CGC, FOR R-1
DR.ADITYA SONDHI, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W SRI.V.G.BHANU PRAKASH, AGA, FOR R-2 TO R-3) ---
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner at Annexure-A and grant mining lease in its favour for carrying out mining activity over an extent of 149.73 hectares in Ingalagi Village, Hospete Taluk, Bellary District and etc.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, THE CHIEF JUSTICE made the following:
2
ORDER
This is a writ petition seeking, in substance, a mandamus to issue mining lease in favour of the writ petitioner on the ground that there has been a letter of intent on behalf of the State Government to grant the lease.
2. Our attention is drawn to the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LIMITED versus MR.S.L.SEAL, ADDITIONAL SECRETARY (STEEL AND MINES), GOVERNMENT OF ODISHA AND OTHERS in Contempt Petition (Civil) No.275 of 2016 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No.374 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.2790 of 2012, where it has been held that there could not have been any letter of intent by the State Government unless there has been a previous approval of the Central Government. The previous approval of the Central Government has been essential.
3
3. Admittedly, in this case, there was no previous approval by the Central Government. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the writ petition.
4. The writ petition stands dismissed.
5. There will be no order as to costs. Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
4
Alert