SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 414

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, A.K.PATNAIK
State of Karnataka – Appellant
Versus
Janthakal Enterprises – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted. Heard.

2. The first Respondent was the holder of a mining lease (No. 593/993) for the period 6.7.1965 to 5.7.1985 under registered lease dated 6.7.1965 in respect of an area of 80.94 hectares in Survey No. 35 (Part) of Tanigehalli and Survey No. 107 (Part) of Hirekandawadi villages, Holalkere Taluk, Chitradurga District, Karnataka. The first Respondent filed an application for renewing the mining lease, on 22.6.1984, without seeking clearance under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The application for renewal was rejected on 30.9.1996. However subsequently by two notifications dated 23.8.2007, the State Government accorded sanction for the first renewal of the mining lease retrospectively for a period of twenty years (from 5.7.1985 to 4.7.2005) and for the second renewal for another period of twenty years (from 5.7.2005 to 4.7.2025) subject to clearance under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and environment clearance under Environment Protection Act, 1986. But the said renewals have not been granted as the first Respondent did not obtain the required clearances. In fact, the proposals submitted by the first Respondent, for obtai















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top