In which judicial case did the Supreme Court hold that in scheduled areas, government land, tribal land and forest land cannot be leased to non-tribals or private companies for mining or industrial purposes, and that such activities can be carried out only by tribals or government undertakings?

Correct option is A

The correct answer is (a) Samata vs State of Andhra Pradesh
Explanation:
• This 1997 judgment is popularly known as the "Samata Judgment."
• The Supreme Court ruled that the word "person" in the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation includes the State Government.
• It held that the transfer of mining leases to private companies in Scheduled Areas was null and void.
• The court emphasized that tribal lands should be preserved for the economic empowerment of the Scheduled Tribes.
• It stated that only the State or a cooperative of tribals can carry out mining in such areas.
Information Booster:
• The Fifth Schedule of the Constitution provides for the administration and control of Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes.
• The Samata judgment is a cornerstone for protecting the rights of tribals against displacement by large corporations.
Additional Knowledge:
State of Madhya Pradesh vs Ram Niwas (Option b)
• This case typically deals with administrative or service law matters rather than land alienation in tribal areas.
T. N. Godavarman vs State of Maharashtra (Option c)
• The T. N. Godavarman Thirumulpad cases (starting 1996) are landmark cases for forest conservation and defining what constitutes "forest land."
Association vs State (NCT of Delhi) (Option d)
• This refers to cases involving the administrative powers of the Delhi government versus the Lieutenant Governor.