Public auction governs quarry lease renewal where no vested right to renewal exists and transparency controls disposal of State resources.

Government quarry resources should ordinarily be disposed of by public auction under the Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, because auction promotes transparency, fair competition, maximum return to the State and public interest. On that basis, refusal to renew the quarry lease outside auction was upheld as not illegal. The document also states that a lessee has no vested right to renewal of a Government quarry lease or to insist on consideration in a particular manner. The petitioner could participate in the auction and, if the stated conditions were met, claim preference by matching the highest bid.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether refusal to renew the quarry lease on the ground that the source had to be settled through public auction was justified under the Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004. (ii) Whether a lessee had any vested right to renewal of a Government quarry lease and whether the source could be directed to be renewed in his favour without auction.

Issue (i): Whether refusal to renew the quarry lease on the ground that the source had to be settled through public auction was justified under the Orissa Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004.

Analysis: The quarry source was examined in the context of Chapter IV, which deals with quarry lease and renewal, and Chapter VI, which deals with disposal of specified minor minerals by public auction. The Court held that public auction is the ordinary rule for disposal of Government property because it ensures transparency, fair competition and maximum return to the State. It relied on settled principles that public property should ordinarily be disposed of by auction and that the State must act in public interest. The Court also took note of the later environmental concerns relating to minor mineral mining and the need for a regulated framework consistent with sustainable mining principles.

Conclusion: The refusal to renew the lease was not illegal, and the auction route was upheld as a valid method of settlement of the source.

Issue (ii): Whether a lessee had any vested right to renewal of a Government quarry lease and whether the source could be directed to be renewed in his favour without auction.

Analysis: The Court applied the principle that no person has a vested right to renewal of Government property or to have an application for grant or renewal considered in a particular manner. It held that the petitioner could not claim perpetual enjoyment of State largesse, though he could participate in the auction and, in the circumstances noted, be given preference if he matched the highest bid. The Court balanced the petitioner's position with the State's interest and the need for fair, equitable and transparent disposal of public resources.

Conclusion: The petitioner had no enforceable vested right to renewal, but his application was to be considered in the auction process with the stated preference.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded only to the limited extent that the quarry source was to be put to auction with an opportunity to the petitioner to participate and claim preference by matching the highest bid, while the challenge to the impugned refusal orders was otherwise rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Government quarry resources should ordinarily be disposed of by public auction in the interest of transparency, maximum revenue and public interest, and a lessee has no vested right to renewal except as provided by the governing rules.

---