08 September 1995
Supreme Court
Download

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. Vs TATA ENGINEERING & LOCO. CO. LTD. & ANR.

Bench: RAMASWAMY,K.
Case number: Appeal Civil 2402 of 1966


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: TATA ENGINEERING & LOCO. CO. LTD. & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT08/09/1995

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. HANSARIA B.L. (J)

CITATION:  JT 1995 (9)   609        1995 SCALE  (5)465

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      Heard the counsel on both sides. Since the mining lease had already  expired by  efflux of  time, we  dispose of the appeal by stating as below:      One M/s.  Douglas Dias had approached this Court by way of appeal, viz., C.A.No. 3996/87 Since it has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Court’s order dated 25th January, 1993, the controversy  does not survive for decision in this case, except that  the impugned decision may be construed to stand in the way of the State to consider similar case differently in future.  In fact  in the  application for  condonation of delay, in  filing this appeal, it was stated in paragraph 2, thus:      "Initially there  was a  decision  taken      that the  petitioner should  only file a      counter affidavit  to the  special leave      petition No.6337  of 1986,  filed by the      respondent  no.2   herein,  M/s  Douglas      Dias, in  the Supreme Court, but without      there being  a proper  appreciation  and      perusal of  the  judgment  done  by  the      department they came to know that it may      subsequently affect  the rights  of  the      petitioners, while  granting any  mining      lease to  any party.  Ultimately, it was      decided in  the month of November, 1986,      to file  a special leave petition herein      the   Supreme    Court   and   now   the      petitioners are  filing a  petition  for      special  leave   here  in   the  Supreme      Court."      It is  made clear  that the  judgment of the High Court would not  be construed to stand in the way of the appellant to grant  mining leases  in accordance with law and it would not form a precedent.

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

    The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.