Acquired land utilized for alternative purposes may be reclaimed for mining subject to due process and compensation.

The petitioner, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (SECL), a Government Company, challenged a notice dated 28.03.2011 issued by the Collector, Umaria (Respondent No. 3), which granted a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to Respondent No. 1 for operating a petroleum outlet

The petitioner contended that the subject land (Khasra No. 6/1 Kha, Village Kudri) was acquired by the Central Government under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, in 1993 and vested in SECL for coal extraction

SECL argued that the NOC was granted without an opportunity for a hearing and that the proximity of a petrol pump to mining operations involving explosives posed a safety hazard and would result in significant coal loss

Conversely, the State and Respondent No. 3 maintained that the NOC was issued following a rigorous multi-departmental verification process, including reports from the SDO, Patwari, Fire Services, and the Petroleum and Explosive Safety Department

They further argued that the petitioner’s acquisition notification lacked specific land details beyond plot numbers

1. Whether the grant of an NOC for a petroleum outlet on land previously acquired under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, is legally sustainable

2. Whether the petitioner’s right to extract minerals takes precedence over the current operation of a retail outlet when the land is not yet under active mining

The court primarily applied the provisions of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, specifically regarding the vesting of acquired land in the Central Government or a Government Company for mining purposes

It also considered the procedural requirements for granting an NOC for petroleum outlets under the Petroleum Rules and the principles of natural justice regarding the right to be heard

Additionally, the court acknowledged the applicability of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code concerning the identification of land through Khasra numbers versus plot numbers

The Court observed that while the land in Village Kudri had indeed been acquired by the Central Government and vested in SECL for mining operations, the respondent authorities had followed the prescribed regulatory procedure before issuing the NOC

The Court noted the petitioner’s admission that the specific portion of land where the petrol pump is situated is not currently under "active mining operation"

Consequently, the Court found no immediate illegality in the NOC's issuance but recognized the long-term mining rights of SECL.

To resolve the conflict between the present land use (petroleum outlet) and the statutory purpose of the land (coal mining), the Court reasoned that the petitioner’s rights are preserved for the future.

It held that the existence of the petrol pump does not permanently extinguish the petitioner's right to the land

The Court held that if the land occupied by the petroleum outlet is required by SECL for mining at a later stage, the competent authorities may take over the land through the "due process of law"

However, the Court mandated that any such future acquisition or displacement of the petroleum outlet shall be subject to the payment of "appropriate compensation" to the affected parties in accordance with the law