Premature challenge to mineral concession recommendation rejected; comparative merits must wait until statutory approval is considered.
Where a mineral concession regime requires prior approval of the Central Government, a State Government recommendation is only an intermediate step and does not amount to a final grant. A writ petition challenging that recommendation was therefore premature, and the High Court should not have examined comparative merit, special reasons, or the applicable priority clause before the approval authority acted. The matter was remitted for decision on approval in accordance with law, leaving those issues to be considered at the statutory approval stage.
Issues: Whether the writ petition was premature and whether the High Court could decide the legality of the State Government's recommendation before the Central Government acted on it.
Analysis: The recommendation made by the State Government under the mining law was only a step towards obtaining prior approval of the Central Government and did not amount to a final grant. The statutory scheme required the Central Government to examine the recommendation under the relevant approval provisions, and the High Court ought not to have entered upon the merits of the inter se comparison or the existence of special reasons at that stage. In such a situation, a writ petition challenging the recommendation itself was held to be premature, and the question whether the earlier or amended priority clause applied was left for consideration in the approval process.
Conclusion: The writ petition was premature and the High Court erred in deciding the merits of the recommendation before the Central Government's decision.
Final Conclusion: The impugned judgment was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Central Government for decision on approval in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute requires prior approval of the Central Government before a mineral concession can take effect, a writ petition challenging the State Government's recommendation is premature and the High Court should not adjudicate the comparative merits or statutory justification at that intermediate stage.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
