Krishna Mohan Singh vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2/2/1987 of Patna High court (Ranchi bench) in CWPC No. 199 of 1987(R). The appellant filed a writ petition for quashing an order dated 27/2/1984 passed by the Under secretary, government of Bihar whereby the right claimed under an unregistered hukumnama by the appellant has been terminated under Section 4-A(1 Of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. According to the appellant, he had been granted a mining lease, by the erstwhile proprietor, for 99 years to collect sand from the alleged leased property. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant relied on Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act to contend that the appellant''s right as a lessee is recognised by the hukumnama and is an enforceable right.

Admittedly the estate in question had become vested in the State of Bihar by operation of Section 3-A of Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, with effect from the data of vesting which is 1/1/1956. Even assuming that the appellant had any light as claimed under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act. that right did not survive as an enforceable right under Section 10 of Bihar Land Reforms Act which relates to subsisting leases subject to certain conditions. In the present case, there was no subsisting lease since there was no valid lease created and the only right claimed was the defence under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act. Even assuming that the appellant had got an enforceable lease subsisting on the date of vesting, the period of mining lease which could be granted thereafter could not extend for more than 20 years as per Section 8(1 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. Admittedly, the estate has vested in the State government on 1/1/1956 and the unregistered hukumnama was terminated only in the year 1984. In other words, 20 years'' period had come to an end by 1/1/1976 and in fact the appellant had enjoyed the benefit of this hukumnama for 8 years more than the statutory maximum period of 20 years for which a mining lease could have been granted under the law applicable. In these circumstances, we see no merit in this appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.