Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (2.03 seconds)

Monnet Ispat And Energy Ltd vs Union Of India And Ors on 26 July, 2012

6. There is no case for the Government of Kerala that the area covered by the nine applications pending have been notified in terms of Section 17 A (2) under the Mines and Minerals 8 WP(C) Nos. 34345/2010, 34346/2010 & 5420/2011 (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. It cannot therefore be said that these areas have been reserved for being held by the State Government for the purpose of mining and operation to the exclusion of private entrepreneurs. {See: Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others [JT 2012 (7) SC 50]}. The specific direction in Ext.P24 order is to reconsider the nine applications in the light of the observations contained therein particularly paragraph 9 thereof. A reading of Section 10 (3) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rule 63 A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 throws light. The disposal of the application in terms of Rule 63 A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 and facilitation to private entrepreneurs in the National Mineral Policy, 2008 have obviously been overlooked. The Government of Kerala has already exercised its discretion in terms of the mining policy then in vogue by recommending to the Government of India for the grant of approval for mining lease. A rejection of the applications allegedly on the basis of a changed policy at this 9 WP(C) Nos. 34345/2010, 34346/2010 & 5420/2011 distance of time after the Government of India has accorded sanction for the grant of mining lease may not be justified. I am afraid that the Government of Keala has not understood the purport and import of Ext.P24 order of the remand in the correct perspective.
Supreme Court of India Cites 176 - Cited by 272 - R M Lodha - Full Document

Deepak Kumar And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 25 February, 2011

7. The Government of Kerala has a contention based on Deepak Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana and others [(2012) 4 SCC 629] that environmental clearance has not been obtained prior to the grant of mining lease from the Ministry of Environment and Forest. But I find from Ext.P11 communication of the Government of India and Ext.P12 order in relation to the four applications that environmental clearance should be obtained. The relevant clause therein is extracted here below.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 48 - D Chaudhary - Full Document
1