Delhi High Court - Orders
Nu Vista Limited vs Union Of India And Ors on 17 March, 2023
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~57
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 2533/2023 and CM APPL. 9683/2023
NU VISTA LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Khemka, Mr. Sandeep Dash,
Mr. Aditya Agarwal, Mr. Himani
Singh, Advocates (M: 9920427458)
Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Uday N. Tiwary, Mr. P. S.
Sudheer, Ms. Anupama Dhruve, Mr.
Rishi Maheswari, Ms. Anne Mathew,
Mr. Bharat Sood, advocates (M:
9891760039)
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra,
CGSC for R-1 & R-2. (M:
9811472444).
Mr. Vishal Prasad, Advocate for R-3.
(M; 9999212037).
Ms. Archana Surve Advocate for UOI
(M: 9921498000).
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 17.03.2023 W.P.(C) 2533/2023 and CM APPL. 9683/2023 (Interim Relief)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner- Nu Vista Ltd. (previously Emami Cement Ltd.) applied for grant of a mining lease for limestone on 21st April 2011 in village Dhandani located in Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (hereinafter 'the said mine'). The said mining lease dated 6th January 2017 was applied for by the Petitioner for catering to its own cement plant which is to be used as a captive mine and is located in the same area.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR W.P.(C) 2533/2023 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:20.03.2023 19:34:433. A Memorandum of Understanding ('MoU') dated 23rd March 2007 was entered into by the State of Chhattisgarh - Respondent No. 3 and the Petitioner. The State of Chhattisgarh had issued a Letter of Intent ('LoI') to the Petitioner for granting mining lease for a period of 30 years subject to conditions on 5th September, 2014.
4. Subsequently, the Petitioner applied for Environment Clearance ('EC') of the proposed said mine before the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change ('MoEF'), which was received via letter dated 25th February, 2019. In the meantime, the date for commencement of mining as per the mining lease was coming to an end on 6th January, 2019 due to non- operationalisation of the said mine within a period of two years as prescribed under Section 4A of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 ('MMDR Act').
5. Awaiting the EC of the said mine, the Petitioner had made an application dated 28th December 2018 for keeping the grant of mining rights under the mining lease alive in terms of Section 4A of the MMDR Act. Vide order dated 23rd February 2021 the State of Chhattisgarh while recognising that the Petitioner's ground for non-operationalisation of mining operations was genuine, however expressed that the same could not be considered as the application was belated in terms of Rule 20(3) of Minerals (other than Atomic & Hydro Carbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016 ('2016 Rules') as it stood prior to November, 2021.
6. The Petitioner challenged this order passed by State of Chhattisgarh before the Revisionary Authority i.e. the Central Government, in Revision Application No. 12/01/2021/RC-II titled 'M/s. Nu Vistas Ltd. v. State of Chhattisgarh' under Section 30 of the MMDR Act. The said Revision Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR W.P.(C) 2533/2023 Page 2 of 4 Signing Date:20.03.2023 19:34:43 application was dismissed vide order dated 24th January 2023. The present petition challenges the said two orders dated 24th January, 2023 and 23rd February, 2021 ('impugned orders').
7. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that while under provision to Section 4(A)(4) of the MMDR Act, the application for keeping the lease valid could have been made any time before lapse, Rule 20 of the 2016 Rules specified a period of three months prior to the lapse of the lease which would, therefore be contrary to the provision Section 4 of the MMDR Act. He also highlights the fact that the said Rule 20 of the 2016 Rules has been amended w.e.f. 2nd November, 2021, where the power to condone the delay vests with the State Government.
8. He further submits that since the said mine is a captive mine, and the Petitioner's cement plant located in the same area has already started functioning in the State of Chhattisgarh, the Petitioner is interested in continuing the mining operations as the EC has already been received on 25th February, 2019. He thus submits that the impugned orders be set aside, and the matter could be reconsidered by the State of Chhattisgarh.
9. On behalf of the Central Government, it is submitted that the State of Chhattisgarh is the main contesting party in the matter.
10. Mr. Vishal Prasad, ld. Counsel appearing for the State of Chhattisgarh submits that he has sought instructions from the State and is yet to receive the same.
11. Vide Order dated 7th March 2023, this Court recorded the issue involved in the petition as follows:
"The question raised in this petition is whether the Petitioner is entitled for extension Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR W.P.(C) 2533/2023 Page 3 of 4 Signing Date:20.03.2023 19:34:43 or revival of the mining lease which was allotted to it. The Revisionary Authority, Ministry of Mines has disposed of the Revision Application No. 12/01/2021/RC-II, vide its impugned Order No. 05/2023 dated 24th January, 2023, on the ground that the same is belated."
12. Further, a perusal of this record would show that the delay, if any, in the Petitioner's filing of the application for extension of time to commence mining operations, would be just two plus months, though the same was filed prior to the lapse. In this background, since mining operations are crucial for the State's exchequer and the clearance having now been released, in the prima facie opinion of this court, the same deserves consideration by the State of Chhattisgarh. Accordingly, let instructions be obtained by the ld. Counsel for the State of Chhattisgarh on the following issues:-
i) Whether the State is willing to consider the Petitioner's application for extension or revival of the grant of mining rights under the lease?
ii) If so, whether the Petitioner's case can be remanded back to the State of Chhattisgarh for a reconsideration.
13. On these two issues, an affidavit shall be filed by the next date of hearing. In the meantime, the status quo shall be maintained in respect of the said mine.
14. List on 8th May, 2023 on top of board.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J MARCH 17, 2023 mr/kt Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR W.P.(C) 2533/2023 Page 4 of 4 Signing Date:20.03.2023 19:34:43