'Mine' Under Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act Vests In Central Government, Irrespective Of Who Owns It : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that if any land fell within the expression 'mine' under the Section 2(h) of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 it would stand transferred to and vest in the Central Government under Section 3(1), irrespective of who owns the said land. "The focus of Section 2(h) read with Section 3(1) is on the property and not on who the owner of the property is."The Apex Court noted that the residence of officers and staff of coal-mines would also fall under the ambit of the definition of 'mine'. While allowing the appeal and overturning the order of the Jharkhand High Court, which had set aside eviction orders passed under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973, a Bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian noted -"What was contemplated to be a summary proceeding for the eviction of unauthorized occupants from public premises under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971(hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), having turned out to be a frustrating legal marathon spread over a period of 38 years, eventually culminating in the High Court setting aside the orders of eviction passed under the Act…"Factual BackgroundThe concerned property was purchased by one Jamini Mohan Majumdar, who was described as "Manager" of East Godhur Colliery in registered sale deed dated 05.02.1945. The Parliament enacted the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 ("Act") for acquisition and transfer of right, title and ownership of coal mines enumerated in the Scheduled. One of these coal mines was the East Godhur in Dhanbad and its owner was reflected as East Godhur Colliery Company (Private) Limited. Jamini sold the property under four different sale deeds executed on 17.01.1984. Thereafter, the same year, the Estate Officer Dhanbad initiated proceedings against the respondents on the allegation that they were unauthorised occupants. Eventually, the eviction order was passed on 18.09.1985. On appeal, the same was set aside by the District Court and it remanded the matter back to the concerned Estate Officer. On 08.03.1989, the Estate Officer dropped the eviction proceedings declaring the respondents to be authorised occupants. However, this order was also set aside by the District Court on appeal. Subsequently, vide order dated 17.07.1998, the High Court set aside the order of the District Court and remanded it back. The District Court passed an order on 28.09.2000 directing eviction. This order was set aside by the Single Judge of the High Court and was later, on 19.02.2015, confirmed by the Division Bench. Analysis by the Supreme Court The Court noted that the going back and forth in the present matter was attributable to the determination of the issue - whether the property in occupation of the respondents was covered by the definition of 'mine' in Section 2(h) of the Act. It observed that the objection of the respondents were two-fold - a. The property was not 'mine', but a private property andb. As per the Report of the Court Commissioner there was no mark of colliery in the concerned land. It was argued that the concerned land did not belong to the East Godhur Coal Mine. The Court was of the view that as per Section 3(1) of the Act, on 01.05.1973, the right, title and interest in relation to the coal-mines specified in the Schedule was vested in the Central Government free from all encumbrances. It was clarified, on perusal of the provision, all 'coal-mines' stood transferred to the Government, and the ownership of the land was immaterial. Referring to Section 2(h), which defines 'mine', it observed that under sub-clause (xi), even the lands and buildings used solely for the location of the management, sale or liaison offices or for the residence of officers and staff were also included in the definition of the word "mine". Section 2(h)(xi) reads as under - 2. Definitions. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,[...](h) " mine" means any excavation where any operation for the purpose of searching for or obtaining minerals has been or is being carried on, and includes—[...](xi) all lands and buildings other than those referred to in sub clause (x), wherever situated, if solely used for the location of the management, sale or liaison offices, or for the residence of officers and staff, of the mine; As per the opinion of the Court, the objection that the land was not used as a colliery was irrelevant as Section 2(h)(xi) uses the word 'wherever situated'. Moreover, on careful reading of the sale deed dated 05.02.1945, the Court noted that colliery work was allowed to be carried out in the concerned property. Reliance on the Report of the Court Commission was held to be immaterial as the inspection was undertaken after almost two or three decades after nationalisation.Case Name: M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v. Mahendra Pal Bhatia And Ors.Citation: 2022...

'Mine' Under Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act Vests In Central Government, Irrespective Of Who Owns It : Supreme Court

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

'Mine' Under Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act Vests In Central Government, Irrespective Of Who Owns It : Supreme Court

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers