Govt. of A. P. vs Obulapuram Minig. Co. P. Ltd.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2011 Supreme(SC) 1250

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.H. Kapadia, CJI., Aftab Alam, Swatanter Kumar, JJ.
Govt. of A.P. & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
M/s Obulapuram Minig. Co. P. Ltd. & Ors. Etc. - Respondents
Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos. 7366-7367/2010 With W.P. (Crl.) No. 66 of 2010 With S.L.P. (C) Nos. 17064-17065 of 2010 With S.L.P. (C) No.........../2010 (CC 16829/2010) With S.L.P. (C) No........../2010 (CC 16830/2010) With W.P. (C) No.562 of 2009Writ Petition (C) No.411 of 2010 With S.L.P. (C) No.353 of 2011 With S.L.P. (C) Nos.15655-15658/2011 With S.L.P. (C) Nos.15659-15684 of 2011
Decided On : 23-09-2011

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Adv., (A.C.) Mr. Siddharth Chaudhary, Adv., (A.C.) In SLP 7366-67/2010: Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, AG. Mr. T.V. Ratnam, Adv., In SLP 32690-91/2010: Mr. Sindhu T.P., Adv., Mr. P.V. Vinod, Adv., Mr. P.V. Dinesh, Adv., In WP 66/2010: Mr. B.S. Iyengar, Adv., Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv., In SLP 17064-65/2010: Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, ASG. Mr. T.V. Ratnam, Adv., In CC 16829/2010 and Mr. Sridhar Potaraju, Adv., 16830/2010: In WP 562/2009: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Adv., Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, Adv., In WP 411/2010: Mr. Ranvir Singh, Adv., Mr. P. Ramesh Kumar, Adv., Ms. Rajkumari Banju, Adv., In SLP 353/2011: Mr. G. Umapathy, Adv., Ms. Sudha Umapathy, Adv., Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Adv., In SLP 15655-58/11 & 15659-84/11/2011:Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Adv., Mr. K. Raghavacharayulu, Adv., Mr. Sridhar Potaraju, Adv., Mr. G. Prabhakar, Adv., Mr. G. Gaochangpou, Adv., For MoEF: Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati,AG. Mr. Harris Beeran, Adv., Mr. Nishanth Patil, Adv., Mr. Harin P. Raval, ASG. Mr. Ashok Bhan, Adv., Ms. Satya Siddiqui, Adv., Mr. Anando Mukherjee, Adv., Ms. Asha G. Nair, Adv., Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra, Adv., Mr. S.S. Rawat, Adv., Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv., Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv., Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Adv., Mr. Krishan Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. P.V. Dinesh, Adv., Mr. Siddhartha, Adv., For Karnataka: Mr. Raju Ramachandran, Sr. Adv. Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Adv., Mr. R.G. Kolle, Adv., Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, Adv., Mr. G.N. Reddy, Adv., Mr. Ashok Bhan, Adv., Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv., Ms. Sukhbeer Kaur Bajwa, Adv., Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv., Mr. H.P. Raval,ASG. Ms. Ranjana Narayan, Adv., Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv., Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sanjeev K. Kapoor, Adv., Mr. Gaurav Juneja, Adv., for M/s. Khaitan & Co., Advs., For FIMI: Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina, Sr. Adv. Ms. Kiran Suri, Adv., Mr. K.N. Phanindra, Adv., Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv., Ms. Aparna Mathew, Adv., Mr. F.S. Nariman, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sunil Dogra, Adv., for M/s. Lawyers Knit and Co.,Advs. Ms. C.K. Sucharita, Adv., Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv., Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Adv., Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra-I, Adv., Mr. Jay Savla, Adv., Mr. D. Julius Raimei, Adv., Mr. Sumit Ghosh, Adv., Ms. Renuka Sahu, Adv., Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Syed Naqvi, Adv., Ms. Namrata Kapoor Sharma, Adv., Mr. Kunal Verma, Adv., Mr. D.L.N. Rao, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.K. Kulkarni, Adv., Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, Adv., Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Adv., Mr. R.S. Suri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Avinash Kumar, Adv., Mr. K.S. Prasad, Adv., For NMDC Ltd.:Mr. Parag P. Tripathi,ASG. Mr. K. Raghavacharayulu, Adv., Mr. Devadatt S. Kamat, Adv., Mr. S. Sukumaran, Adv., Mr. D. Julius Riamei, Adv., Mr. Anand Sukumar, Adv., Mr. Bhupesh Kumar Pathak, Adv., Ms. Meera Mathur, Adv., Mr. Shekhar G. Devasa, Adv., Mr. Aljo Joseph, Adv., Mr. Rohit Pandey, Adv., Mr. D.K. Garg, Adv., Mr. Sashi Karan Shetty, Adv., Dr. Sushil Balwada, Adv., For Mysore Minerals Mr. L.N. Rao, Sr. Adv. Ltd. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, Adv., Mr. A.K. Vasanth, Adv., Mr. B.D. Vivek, Adv., Mr. Venkatesh I. Naik, Adv., Mr. P. Ramesh Kumar, Adv., Mr. Ranvir Singh, Adv., Ms. Kiran Suri, Adv., Mr. K.N. Phanindra, Adv., Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv., Ms. Aparna Mattoo, Adv., Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Ms. Kiran Suri, Adv., Mr. K.N. Phanindra, Adv., Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv., Ms. Aparna Mattoo, Adv., Mr. K.K. Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Akhil Anand, Adv., Mr. Parveen Sehrawat, Adv., Mr. Ankur Talwar, Adv., Mr. Rohit Bhatt, Adv., Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Adv., Mr. E.C. Agrawala, Adv., Mr. Sajan, Adv., Mr. G.V.R. Choudary, Adv., Mr. K. Shivraj Choudhuri, Adv., Mr. A. Chandra Sekhar, Adv., Mr. R.S. Suri, Sr. Adv. Mr. N.L. Ganapathi, Adv., Mr. K.S. Prasad, Adv., Ms. Aparna Bhat, Adv., Mr. B.S. Iyengar, Adv., Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv., M/s. AP & J Chambers, Advocates.

Headnote:
Evidence – Condo nation of delay – Jurisdiction - Having heard learned counsel for respective parties on Report submitted by Central Empowered Committee regarding E-auction and related issues pertaining to mining leases in Districts Bellary Court are happy to note that sale of iron ore through E-auction has fetched from part disposal of accumulated inventory of iron ore – Held, Vide said Report of CEC, it is further pointed out to this Court that massive illegal mining by a third party was being done in mining lease NMDC - That, despite various complaints to numerous authorities in State of Karnataka by no steps were taken to prevent that third party from resorting to massive illegal mining in mining lease till this Court banned mining - These complaints were made against third party, namely Mining Syndicate for encroaching into mining lease area - Even complaint lodged by against Police Circle Inspector n was interpolated See Annexure R-1 to Report being letter Court also want CBI to investigate he above illegalities including encroachment by Deccan Mining Syndicate in area leased out to NMDC - This order we have indicated broadly scope of investigations to be carried out by CBI - There are number of other instances of illegal mining which are referred to in Report of. To begin with Court have focused on alleged illegalities undertaken by these two companies - As and when reports are submitted by CEC alleging similar illegal mining activities and other illegalities committed by other companies shall look into those reports separately - Thus, further directions will be given from time to time by this Court - CEC as well as Joint Team have received a number of representations from respective lease holders against findings of the Joint Team - Court hereby permit CEC to consider these representations after hearing parties findings of CEC in this regard thereafter should be placed before this Court for appropriate directions – Order accordingly

ORDER :

1. Having heard learned counsel for respective parties on the Report dated 21st September, 2011, submitted by Central Empowered Committee [`CEC', for short] regarding E-auction and related issues pertaining to mining leases in Districts Bellary, Chitradurga and Tumkur, we are happy to note that the sale of iron ore through E-auction has fetched Rs. 92.67 cr. from part disposal of the accumulated inventory of iron ore. We are of the view that E- auction, as suggested by the Monitoring Committee, should continue so that best possible price is fetched.

2. In the above circumstances, we accept the recommendation contained in the Report on E-auction which reads as follows :

"M/s NMDC may be allowed to continue mining operations in the ML Nos.2396 and 1111 subject to the conditions that (a) the entire production of iron ore from these two mining leases will be sold only through e-auction by the Monitoring Committee and (b) the Monitoring Committee will presently disburse 80% of the sale proceeds to M/s NMDC Ltd."

3. We make it clear that E-auction will take place irrespective of long term contracts entered into by M/s. NMDC. We also make it clear that no Court in this Country will take up any challenge to E-auction, except this Court.

(ii) The Report of CEC shows that serious illegalities have taken place in respect of mining lease No. 2434 of M/s. Associated Mining Company ("M/s. AMC" for short). The Report shows serious illegalities having taken place in respect of said mining lease by way of illegal grant of renewal of mining lease; the existing locations of the boundary pillars being completely different from the sanctioned lease sketch and quantity of iron ore shown to have been produced and dispatched from the mining lease being far in excess of the quantity that could have been physically produced and dispatched from the mining lease area. Besides illegalities having taken place in respect of the mining lease, as indicated above, other illegalities are also enumerated in the said Report (see paras 8, 9 and 10 of the Report). Such illegalities are also referred to in the Report dated 27.07.2011 of the Karnataka Lokayukta.

4. On going through the Report of CEC, this Court prima facie is satisfied that at the relevant time there existed linkages between the alleged illegal mining in Bellary Reserved Forest falling in District Anantpur in Andhra Pradesh and the above mentioned illegalities in Bellary District of Karnataka. It appears from the Report that amongst various illegalities, one of the cited illegalities is that the material illegally extracted by M/s AMC was routed (transported) to the nearest Port in Vishakapatnam through District Anantpur in Andhra Pradesh. For this reason, we want investigations into above alleged illegalities to be carried out by CBI.

5. On the next date of hearing, we also want to know from CBI the status of its investigations which CBI has undertaken in respect of a mining company, M/s. Obulapuram Mining Company Private Limited in Andhra Pradesh vide FIR No. RC 17A/2009-CBI (Hyderabad).

(iii) Vide the said Report of CEC, it is further pointed out to this Court that massive illegal mining by a third party was being done in mining lease No. 1111 of M/s. NMDC. That, despite various complaints to the numerous authorities in the State of Karnataka by M/s. NMDC no steps were taken to prevent that third party from resorting to massive illegal mining in mining lease No. 1111 of M/s. NMDC till this Court banned mining. These complaints were made against the third party, namely, M/s. Deccan Mining Syndicate ("DMS" for short) for encroaching into M/s. NMDC's mining lease area. Even the complaint lodged by M/s. NMDC against M/s. DMS to the Police Circle Inspector, Sandur on 10.07.2009 was interpolated (See Annexure R-1 to the Report being letter dated 15.09.2011 by M/s. NMDC Limited to CEC). We also want CBI to investigate the above illegalities including encroachment by M/s. Deccan Mining Syndicate in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 Supreme(SC) 1250

Related Judgments

Plastikos Packaging VS Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

SYSTEMS MANUFACTURING LTD VS SYSTEMS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 665

JOGENDRA SINGH VS SURESH MANJULAPUR - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 662

MYSORE WINE PRODUCTS AND ALLIED CO. LTD. , BANGALORE VS PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 663

Bose VS State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Salaikiramam P. S. , - 2000 Supreme(Mad) 1273

Jain Construction Company VS State of Rajasthan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 912

Voltas Limited VS Joint Collector, Medak - 2000 Supreme(AP) 945

STATE OF BIHAR VS SURENDRA SINGH RAUTELA ALIAS BENGALI - 2000 Supreme(Jhk) 45

Krishna Kumar VS Gulab Khan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 1546

KARSANBHAI DAHYABHAI PARMAR VS DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE - 2000 Supreme(Guj) 1009