Finality of inter partes adjudication bars fresh reconsideration of a mining lease claim governed by earlier binding directions.

A mining lease dispute under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 was held to be governed by an earlier final decision between the same parties. Once the controversy had attained finality inter partes, the High Court could not direct fresh consideration on the same issue, and later proceedings inconsistent with the Supreme Court's subsisting directions could not operate against the appellants. The impugned directions for reconsideration were therefore set aside, and the earlier binding adjudication continued to govern the dispute.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court could direct fresh consideration of the mining lease application when an earlier decision between the same parties had already attained finality and the subsequent proceedings were governed by the Supreme Court's earlier directions.

Analysis: The dispute concerned a mining lease claim under Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 read with Rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. An earlier decision between the same parties had already settled the matter, and finality attached to that decision. Once a matter is finally decided inter partes, a contrary view cannot be taken in later proceedings on the same controversy. The Court also noted that any decision taken by the State Government or the Central Government during the subsistence of the Supreme Court's stay order could not operate against the appellants' case.

Conclusion: The High Court's directions were set aside and the earlier directions of the Supreme Court were held to govern the dispute. The outcome was in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent that the impugned directions for reconsideration were displaced by the earlier binding adjudication, and the subsequent administrative decisions were rendered ineffective.

Ratio Decidendi: A dispute finally decided between the same parties cannot be reopened or decided differently in later proceedings, and subordinate proceedings inconsistent with a subsisting Supreme Court order have no operative effect.

---