Deemed continuation of mining lease allowed regulated removal of verified stacked iron ore on notice and royalty payment.

A timely renewal application kept the mining lease alive by operation of the deeming provision in Rule 24A(6), so the lease was treated as continued pending disposal of the renewal request. On that footing, the lessee was entitled to remove the already extracted and stacked iron ore, because the claim did not depend on post-expiry rights under the lease deed. Removal could, however, be regulated by notice to the mining authorities, supervision by a competent officer, payment of royalty, and compliance within the stipulated time.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the mining lease was deemed to continue under Rule 24A(6) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 pending disposal of the renewal application. (ii) Whether the petitioner could be permitted to lift the already extracted and stacked iron ore on notice to the mining authorities and on payment of royalty.

Issue (i): Whether the mining lease was deemed to continue under Rule 24A(6) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 pending disposal of the renewal application.

Analysis: The renewal application had been filed within the statutory time prescribed by Rule 24A(1). Once such an application remained undisposed of before the expiry of the lease, the deeming provision in Rule 24A(6) operated to keep the lease alive. A deeming clause must be given its intended effect, and the consequences flowing from the legal fiction must also be treated as real for the purpose for which it was created.

Conclusion: The lease was deemed to have been extended and had not expired for the purpose of the petitioner's claim.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner could be permitted to lift the already extracted and stacked iron ore on notice to the mining authorities and on payment of royalty.

Analysis: Since the lease was deemed to continue, the situation was not one where rights following expiry of the lease under the lease deed could be invoked against the petitioner. The refusal provisions relating to renewal did not govern the present claim, as the renewal request had not been rejected by a reasoned order. The extracted ore had been jointly verified and found lying stacked at the site, and removal could be regulated by notice to the authorities, supervision by a competent officer, and payment of royalty.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to remove the extracted ore subject to notice, official supervision, payment of royalty, and completion within the stipulated time.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of permitting removal of the verified extracted iron ore under regulated conditions, on the footing that the mining lease continued by operation of the deeming provision.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory deeming provision extending a mining lease pending renewal must be given full effect, and where the lease is treated as continuing, the lessee may claim removal of duly verified extracted minerals subject to lawful regulation and payment of royalty.

---