Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
EKATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT13/12/1994
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
VENKATACHALA N. (J)
CITATION:
1995 SCC (2) 11 JT 1995 (1) 561
1995 SCALE (1)13
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
ORDER
1. Amendment of the cause title is allowed. Intervention
application is dismissed.
2. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of
the Division Bench of
562
the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated May 3, 1985 made in
Misc.Pet. No. 1260/82 The appellant challenged in the above
writ petition the directions dated 4.5.81, order dated
30.9.81 and a further order dated 9.6.82 passed by the
second respondent Chairman of Special Areas Development
Authority (for short, ’SADA’), Singrauli, in the District of
Sidhi of M.P. directing the appellant under s.26 of the M.P.
Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, (for short,
’Adhiniyam’) to pull down the constructions of the office
buildings staff-quarters etc. made by the appellant contrary
to the provisions of the Adhiniyam. In the High Court, the
controversy centered round the question as to whether the
provisions of the Adhiniyam overlaps the field occupied by
the provisions of the Coal Act, the Coal Bearing Areas
(Acquisition and Development) Act and Mines and Minerals
(Regulations and Development) Act, 1957 (for short, ’the
Act’). The Division Bench held that these Acts have not
occupied the field covered by the Adhiniyam and that,
therefore, the Act is intra-vires the powers of the
legislature. Accordingly, it dismissed the writ petition.
Thus, this appeal by special leave.
3.It is contended by Shri Altaf Ahmed, learned Addl.
Solicitor General, that when the mining operations are to be
carried out under the aforesaid provisions, it would include
the building operations under the Mineral Concession Rules,
1960, (for short, ’the Rules’) made under the Act.
Therefore, the operation of the Adhiniyam stands excluded.
Dr.Ghatate, learned senior counsel for the second
respondent, resisted the contention contending that
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
Adhiniyam regulates the development area under the Adhiniyam
including the construction of buildings within the notified
development plan in the zones; the appellant had constructed
the buildings in Morwa and Jayanthi villages without ob-
taining prior permission from the SADA and that, therefore,
the construction was in contravention of s.26 of the
Adhiniyam. He, therefore, contends that the action was
correctly taken and the Central Acts have no application as
regards the building operations are concerned. The
question, therefore, is as to what is the exact scope of the
operation of the Adhiniyam.
4.Section 2(c) of the Adhiniyam-defines "building", s.2(d)
defines "building operations", s.2(f) defines "development",
s.2(g) defines "development plan", s.2(i) defines "existing
land use map" and s.2(j) defines "land". A conspectus of
these definitions would indicate that the Adhiniyam intends
to apply to carrying out of the development of the building,
engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or
under any land or the making of any material change in any
building or land or in the use of either and includes sub-
division of any land within the zoning plan and the land use
map made under the provisions of the Act.
5.Section 38 in Chapter VII empowers the State Government by
a notification to establish Town and Country Development
Authority which authority has been given power to develop
the land.. In Chapter 111, it is empowered to make survey by
the Director, preparation of regional plans, finalisation
thereof under ss. 6 to 9. Section 10, thereafter, envisages
that:
"Notwithstanding anything contained in any
other law for the time being in force, on or
after the date of publication of the draft
regional plan, no person, authority,
department of government or any other person
shall change the use of the land
563
for any purpose other than agriculture, or
carry out any development in respect of any
land contrary to the provisions of the draft
plan, without the prior approval of the
Director or an officer not below the rank of
Deputy Director authorised by the Director in
this behalf."
6. Chapter IV deals with preparation of the planning area
and development plans. Sections 13 to 15 envisage making or
preparation of developmental plans and existing land use
maps. By publication under s.15(1), s.16 comes into
operation which provides that:-
"(1) On the publication of the existing land
use map under s. 15 ---
(a) no person shall institute or change the
use of any land or carry out any development
of land for any purpose other than that
indicated in the existing land use map without
the permission in writing of the Director.
(Proviso and Clause (b) are not material for
the purpose of this case, hence omitted.)
7. Under s.24, the State Government have kept the power
with them to control and use of the land for overall
development as per the plans of the Adhiniyam. Section
24(2) gives power to the State Government to remove
difficulties in the implementation of the provisions of the
Act. Section 25 postulates that "after coming into force of
the development plan, the use and development of land shall
conform to the provision of the development plan". In other
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
words, after it has come into force the development of the
land shall be only in conformity with the developmental
plan. In other words it is confined to building operations.
Any constructions if had been made prior to the coming into
force of development plan, it does not come within the
prohibition contained under s.26. But thereafter, s.26
expressly prohibits constructions except under planned
development of land with prior permission. For permission,
when needed, an application in that behalf shall be made by
any person under s.29 and by the State Government or the
Central Government or any local authority or special
authority under s.27. The Director has been given power to
grant permission either unconditionally or conditionally or
refuse the same under s.30. A right of appeal by the ag-
grieved person is given under s.31 to the appellate
authority and a further revision to the State Government
under s.32.
8. Thus, a reading of these provisions would clearly
indicate that the Adhiniyam intends to operate within the
zonal plans or the developed area plans and the land use map
published under the Adhiniyam and construction of the
building or development of the land shall be made in con-
formity with the provisions of the Adhiniyam, after the
publication of the plans as required ultimately under s.25
of the Act. Any contravention thereof would be a
contravention under s.26 of the Adhiniyam and the authority
has the power to take appropriate action as required there-
under.
9. The question, therefore, emerges whether the
construction made by the appellant is in conformity with the
land use map prepared by the SADA and the zonal plan. In
the reply given to the shown cause notice issued by the
SADA, the appellant had admitted that SADA published the
plan but initially it was contended that the plan was not
extended to the two villages in
564
which constructions had been carried out for which notice
was given. It was also stated that the Collector had
acquired the land of 130 acres and odd in village Punjrah
for construction of office buildings staff quarters,
workers’ buildings etc. for which there was no notice issued
by SADA. At the time of hearing, the contention that the
map was not applicable to the two areas was given up. In
the writ petition, no specific plea was taken that these two
villages are within the mining areas and that the zonal
declaration over laps the mining area. It is seen that
under the Coal Act and the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition
and Development) Act, the mining area stands vested in the
appellant and it is entitled to carry on mining operations
under the Act and the Rules. The operation of Adhiniyam in
relation to mining operation is void. Construction of of-
fice building, staff quarters, providing facilities for
successful and effective mining operations, the welfare
measures and providing right to residence and civic ameni-
ties to the staff and workmen are incidental or ancillary to
the main purpose i.e. mining operation under the Act and the
Rules. The Adhiniyam regulates building planned development
and the developments incidental and ancillary thereto.
Under these circumstances, the High Court has rightly held
that the operation of Adhiniyam to the above extent does not
trench upon the field of operation under provisions of the
Central Acts. Both could harmoniously coexist and operate
in the respective areas without colliding with each other.
The provisions being construed in that backdrop and
operational efficacy, we are of the considered view that
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
there is no overlapping of the operation of the Adhiniyam
vis-a-vis the Central Acts.
10.The question emerges that when mining operations are
carried on including actions relating to building operations
incidental or integral to the mining operations, whether the
Adhiniyam gets attracted? As stated earlier, excluding min-
ing development, when the zonal plan was prepared and it was
published for building operations, it would be a notice to
the appellant and if such a zonal plan comes in conflict
with the smooth and effective building operations in the
mining area and would impede its operations which are
regulated as ancillary or incidental and concomitant
necessity under the provisions of the Act, the Rules and
other Central Acts referred to hereinbefore, then it would
always be open to the appellant either to bring it to the
notice of the Director who is competent to make the plans
and have it corrected or in case such an objection was taken
but was not acceded to, it would be open to the appellant to
have it challenged in an appropriate proceeding and have it
declared that it runs contrary to and impinge upon the
mining operations under the relevant provisions of the Act
or Rules. Since on the facts of this case that question was
not raised or controverted, we need not express any opinion
in this behalf If it were such a case that building
operations of the appellant are within the mining area and
the plan of the Adhiniyam is sought to be implemented in
that area, it may be open to the appellant to raise such
objections and the authorities would consider and dispose it
of according to rules or approach the government to remove
the difficulties and the State Govt. would do its best. Or
it may be open to the appellant to have it challenged in an
appropriate forum.
11.The appeal is dismissed accordingly but without costs.
566