Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(2) It shall come into force on the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.

2. Environmental Clearance.- Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 10A of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 (10 of 2015), it is clarified that where the condition of obtaining environmental clearance has not been complied with by the applicant on or before 11 th January, 2017, but all other conditions specified in previous approval or the letter of intent have been fulfilled, the applications shall be considered under that section and mining lease shall be granted by the concerned State Governments in accordance with the notifications issued under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986) (29 of 1986):

57. On a careful perusal of such order we do not find merit in such submission. This is so because that the said order of 4 January 2017 merely provides for obtaining the EC certificate subsequently where it could not be obtained on or before 11 January 2017. At the same time, the said order clearly lays down that no mining activity shall commence until the applicant obtains the EC as laid down under the Environment Protection Act and Rules, retaining such mandatory requirement to obtain the EC. In the given case, the petitioner has not only failed to obtain the required EC and failed to comply with such conditions under the Environment Protection Act on 11 January 2017 i.e. the statutory cut-

59. For the reasons noted above, we are not able to accept that such conditions have been done away with the government's order dated 4 January 2017 and/or 5 January 2017 which in fact reiterate the requirements set out in the prior approval and LOI respectively. The letter of Central Government dated 5 January 2017 in fact directs the concerned departments where cases are pending in the State to take requisite steps for grant of leases within the statutory timeline of 11 January 2017. Thus, it is apparent that the application of the petitioner dated 6 January 2017 is misconstrued and misleading. Not only this, but the petitioner has also failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the mining WP-4160-2024.docx plan dated 26 December 2011 and the modifying mining plan dated 26 November 2015 which was issued on a without prejudice basis and contingent upon compliance by the petitioner, with the provisions under the Mines Act and other allied laws including the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and Rules. All of this brings to light that the petitioner has not complied with the statutory mandate under Section 10A(2)(c) for having a valid mining lease in law, on or before the statutory cut-off date of 11 January 2017, which is sacrosanct and non- negotiable. The petitioner has also placed heavy reliance on what it calls as the grant order dated 11 January 2017, issued by respondent no.4-State Government. By this order, the State Government had sanctioned the grant of mining lease for a period of 50 years in favour of the petitioner. The following clause from such document is noted below:-

"T) As per the Notification of Ministry of Mines No. 7/1/2016.M-IV(Part 1) dtd 4/1/2017, No mining activity shall commence unless and until the applicant obtains environmental clearance as laid down under the environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the rules made there under.
U) These leases so executed, would entail to be treated null and void if the EC is finally rejected."

The above document in fact clearly notes two vital aspects. Firstly, it reiterates that no mining activity shall commence unless and until the applicant obtains the EC as laid down under the Environment Protection Act and Rules. Secondly, the leases so executed shall be null and void if the EC is finally rejected.