M/s. Deccan Mining Syndicate vs State of Karnataka and Sri Praveen Kumar Nikkam

D.H. Waghela, C.J.—The petitioner in the present Writ Petition has challenged the validity of the order/communication dated 25.6.2008 passed by the Director of Mines & Geology, recommending to the Government of Karnataka for grant of mining lease in favour of Respondent No. 3 - Praveen Kumar Nikkam, over an extent of 60 acres of land in Karthikeshwara Village, Sandur Taluk, Bellary District, comprised at Additional De-reserved Block No. 17 of the notification dated 15.3.2003 issued under Rule 59 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, by the State Government. It is stated at the Bar that an interim order of stay has been operating in the connected matters and the Central Government has not passed any order u/s 5(1) of the M.M.D.R. Act, 1957. The counsel submit that the recommendation or proposal of the State Government has been returned by the Central Government in view of the interim orders granted by this court.

During the pendency of this petition, the Apex Court has, in the matter of Geomin Minerals and Marketing (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and Others, , held at paragraph-29 that, until the Central Government has passed an order either granting or refusing approval u/s 5(1) and Section 11(5) of the Act, it would not be permissible for any person to file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and any such petition, if filed, would be premature.

In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, it would be unnecessary for this court to go into the merits of the matter since the petition is admittedly not maintainable and liable to be dismissed as premature. It is for the authorities of the State and Central Governments to take appropriate action and decision in accordance with law, without being influenced by this order. It is needless to clarify that the contentions of the parties are not dealt with herein and they remain open to be agitated if and when an occasion arises therefor. With the above observations and clarification, the petition is disposed as dismissed, with no order as to cost and interim relief if any is operating in the matter stands vacated.