Interlocutory Application No. 86 of 2014 in Writ Petition (C) No. 435 of 2012. Case: 1. Goa Foundation, 2. In Re: Bandekar Brothers Private Limited Vs Union of India (UOI). Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Interlocutory Application No. 86 of 2014 in Writ Petition (C) No. 435 of 2012 |
| Judges | J.S. Khehar, Jasti Chelameswar and Arjan Kumar Sikri, JJ. |
| Issue | Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 - Rules 27(2), 31 |
| Judgement Date | October 14, 2014 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Order:
1. Through the instant interlocutory application, the applicant-M/s. Bandekar Brothers Private Limited has prayed for a direction to the concerned authorities for restraining them from auctioning the mined mineral ore produced by the applicant prior to 22.11.2007, through e-auction. This prayer is premised on the foundation, that the applicant's above stated mined mineral ore cannot be sold, under the orders passed by this Court. In this behalf, it was the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant, that the applicant had mined 67,285 metric tons of iron ore (Grade 63.19% Fe approximately) prior to 22.11.2007, and therefore, the applicant should be released the aforesaid iron ore, with the right to dispose of the same. A similar submission was made by the applicant for the disposal of 1,00,000 metric tons of old dump (grade 46.15% Fe approximately).
2. According to the learned Counsel for the applicant, the mineral ore mined prior to 22.11.2007, cannot be treated as having been illegitimately mined, and as such, the applicant as also all other similarly placed mining lease holders, should be released the same with liberty to sell the same.
3. Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Advocate, learned amicus, vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant. While doing so, he placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Court in Goa Foundation v. Union of India (2014) 5 SCALE 364. Our pointed attention was invited to the following observations recorded therein:
67. As we have held that the deemed mining leases of the lessees in Goa expired on 22.11.1987 and the maximum period (20 years) of renewal of the deemed mining leases in Goa has also expired on 22.11.2007, mining by the lessees in Goa after 22.11.2007 was illegal. Hence, the order dated 10.09.2012 of the Government of Goa suspending mining operations in the State of Goa and the order dated 14.09.2012 of the MoEF, Government of India, suspending the environmental clearance granted to the mines in the State of Goa, which have been impugned in the writ petitions in the Bombay High Court, Goa Bench (transferred to this Court and registered as transferred cases) cannot be quashed by this Court. The order dated 10.09.2012 of the Government of Goa and the order dated 14.09.2012 of the MoEF will have to continue till decisions are taken by the State Government to grant fresh leases and decisions are taken by the MoEF to grant fresh environmental clearances for mining projects.
68. On 05.10.2012, this Court while issuing notice in Writ Petition (C) No. 435 of 2012 (Goa Foundation v. Union of India and Ors.) also passed orders that all mining operations in the leases identified in the report of the Justice Shah Commission and transportation of iron ore and manganese ore from those leases, whether lying at the mine-head or stockyards, shall remain suspended. Thereafter on 11.11.2013, this Court passed an order that the inventory of the excavated mineral ores lying in different mines stockyards/jetties/ports in the State of Goa made by the Department of Mines and Geology of the Government of Goa be verified and thereafter the whole of the inventorised mineral ores be sold by e-auction and the sale proceeds (less taxes and royalty) be retained in separate fixed deposits (lease-wise) by the State of Goa till this Court delivers judgment in these matters on the legality of the leases from which the mineral ores were extracted. In our...
To continue reading
Request your trial