TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f virgin areas that the period of lease stands enhanced to ten years whereas in respect of other areas the period of lease continues to be five years. This was clearly a substantive amendment which had nothing to do with any procedure. There was no concept of virgin area in the unamended rule which has been introduced for the first time by way of aforesaid amendment. An error is committed by the High Court in holding that fixation of period of lease is also procedural. When a decision to grant lease is substantive in nature, the period for which the lease is to be granted would also be substantive. Thus, the conclusion arrived at by the High Court is contrary to law. It is to be borne in mind that a particular provision in a procedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ears. However, when these leases were still in operation and the said period of five years for which these leases were granted had not expired, Rule came to be amended vide G.O. dated 17.11.2000. The amended rule provided that the period for quarrying stone in respect of virgin areas, which had not been subjected to quarrying earlier, shall be ten years whereas the period of lease for quarrying stone in respect of other areas shall be five years. On the basis of this amendment, these Respondents pleaded that since they were granted lease for quarrying stone in respect of virgin areas, amended provision was made applicable in their cases and they were entitled to continue on lease for a period of ten years. 4. It is in this scenario ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from 01.04.1996 to 31.03.2001. Many persons including Respondents herein submitted their applications pursuant to the aforesaid notification. A public auction was conducted on 13.05.1997 in which the Respondent emerged as the highest bidder who submitted his bid in the sum of ₹ 5,35,000/- for a period of five years. His bid was accepted by the Collector vide his communication dated 05.06.1997 and on the very same date lease deed was executed for a period of five years that is from 05.06.1997 to 04.06.2002. 7. While the aforesaid lease was subsisting, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No. 391 dated 17.11.2000 thereby incorporating amendment to Rule 8 of the 1959 Rules and stipulating that the period of lease for quarrying stone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rit petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Interim stay was granted in favour of the Respondent which was made absolute. This writ petition was ultimately dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The Respondent herein preferred intra-court appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge. There were four other persons whose writ petitions similarly filed were also dismissed and they had also filed appeals. In the meantime, many other similarly situated persons filed writ petitions. All these writ petitions and writ appeals were heard by the Division Bench of the High Court and have been allowed by the High Court, vide its impugned judgment dated 23.04.2008. 9. A perusal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as such amended Rule will be given retrospective effect. 12. Mr. Subramonium Prasad, learned senior Counsel appearing for the Appellants, submitted that though the principle of law is rightly stated by the High Court it has committed an error in holding that the Rule in question is procedural in nature. He argued that even if the amendment to the Rules was substantially procedural, the Rule in question, that is, Rule 8(8) which provided for the period of lease for quarrying stone was of substantive nature inasmuch as by grant of lease under this Rule certain rights were conferred upon the lessee and such a provision cannot be procedural. 13. As mentioned above, though the Legislature has plenary powers of legislation withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t facts, matters or events, the law appointing or regulating the manner in which they are to be enforced or their enjoyment is to be secured by judicial remedy is not within the application of such a presumption. 14. When we keep the aforesaid principle in mind and apply to the facts of the present case, we find adequate force in the aforesaid submission of learned Counsel for the Appellants. It is to be borne in mind that by way of amendment, for the first time, the categories of virgin areas and non-virgin areas were carved out and virgin areas were given better treatment, which was not the position under the unamended Rule. This right, which is substantive in nature, accrued to the virgin areas for the first time by way of amend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
