Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, KULDEEP MATHUR, JJ.
Manohar Lal S/o Shri Gopi Lal Mewada – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 750 of 2024
Decided On : 18-07-2024
MINING LEASE - ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE AND MINING REGULATIONS - RMMCR RULES 9(4), 16(3), 34(1) - The court discussed the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules (RMMCR), particularly focusing on the mandatory requirement of obtaining Environmental Clearance (EC) before commencing mining operations. The court interpreted Rule 9(4) to mean that the period of a mining lease cannot be extended if the lessee fails to comply with statutory obligations, such as obtaining the EC. The court emphasized that the lessee cannot benefit from their own failure to meet legal requirements, which influenced the decision to uphold the communication regarding the expiration of the mining lease.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged a communication from the Mining Engineer stating that his mining lease would expire on 9th May 2024, arguing that the delay in obtaining the Environmental Clearance (EC) should not affect the lease period. The appellant claimed that the lease approved in 2013 should be extended due to delays in the EC process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant failed to obtain the necessary EC before commencing mining operations, which was a mandatory requirement under the RMMCR. The court held that the appellant could not claim an extension of the lease period due to his own delays in compliance with statutory obligations.
Issues: Whether the appellant is entitled to an extension of the mining lease period despite failing to obtain the required Environmental Clearance in a timely manner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the period of a mining lease cannot be extended if the lessee has not complied with the mandatory requirement of obtaining an Environmental Clearance prior to commencing operations, as stipulated in the RMMCR. The court emphasized that the lessee cannot benefit from their own failure to meet legal obligations.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision that the mining lease would expire as communicated, but ordered the respondents to refund the payments made by the appellant with interest.
ORDER :
1. The appellant was aggrieved by the decision of the Mining Engineer communicated to him through the communication dated 21st February 2024 whereby he was informed that the mining lease would expire on 9th May 2024. Challenging this communication, the appellant approached the writ Court in S.B. Writ Petition No. 6641/2024 with a prayer to restrain the respondents to take any action pursuant to the communication dated 21st February 2024.
2. By an order dated 30th May 2024, the writ Court declined to interfere with the communication dated 21st February 2024 on the ground that the lessee who had failed to obtain the Environmental Clearance (in short ‘EC’) cannot be allowed to take benefit of his own wrong.
3. At the outset, we may indicate that the present controversy has its genesis in the decision in Bajri Lease Lol Holders Welfare Society, 2021 SCC Online SC 1043.
4. In Bajri Lease Lol Holders Welfare Society, the following recommendations (except “J”) made by the CEC were approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court:
B. The State Government shall dispense with the Excess Royalty Collection Contract system in respect of any kind of sand mining leases forthwith and the royalty shall be paid on line by the lessee to the State Government and generate royalty paid e-ravanna before transporting of sand from the mining site;
C. The MoEF&CC will issue EC in respect of all the valid Lol holders recommended by the EAC in its meeting held during 2014-2016 without insisting on submission of scientific study report as a precondition for grant of EC within a period of three months. MoEF&CC shall also prescribe detailed methodology in consultation with CMPDI for undertaking replenishment study during the course of mining as discussed in para 11 (iii) of this Report.
D. River sand mining in Rajasthan is permitted to be conducted after obtaining all statutory clearances and payment of dues and applicable taxes following the procedure listed in Para 11 (iii) of this report.
E. The MoEF&CC shall arrange for scrutiny of the DSR prepared as provided in MoEF&CC Guidelines of 2016 and 2020 and the production figures approved in the DSR are scrupulously followed by the authorities under the EP Act 1986 while issuing the EC.
F. The period of actual mining of sand under TWP should be adjusted against the five-year lease period.
G. Government of Rajasthan will constitute an Empowered Committee headed by the Chief Secretary to consider and settle claims of excess payments collected from the Lol holders during the period of working under TWP. The Committee shall examine each of the cases and take a decision in this regard within a period of six months from the date of orders. Monthly progress reports in this regard may be sent to C??.
H. The State Government will auction the sand mining leases after proper ground demarcation and after assessing the extractable sand resources as given in the approved DSR and after obtaining no objection certificates from all concerned authorities. The sale of mining blocks objected to by any of the government departments shall not be put up tender/auction.
I. State Government to review the amendments to Rule 5(4) of RMMCR, 2017 so that it will not be an impediment for execution of sand mining lease.
J. For brazen violation of this Hon'ble Court order dated 16.11.2017 exemplary penalty of Rs.10 lakhs per vehicle and Rs.5 lakhs per cu.m of sand seized may be imposed as a deterrent. This will be in addition to what has already been ordered/collected by the State agencies as penalty/ compensation.
K. State Government of Rajasthan is directed to conduct drone survey in respect of all the
A mining lease holder must obtain Environmental Clearance before commencing operations, and failure to do so precludes any extension of the lease period under the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession R....
The court affirmed that the dies-non period for a mining lease is calculated from the date of registration, and failure to obtain necessary clearances precludes the lessee from claiming benefits.
No lapsing of a mining lease occurs where operations are statutorily restrained until requisite environmental clearances are obtained, making provisions inapplicable until such clearances are availab....
Mining authorities cannot refuse lease extensions based on policy when statutory provisions support such extension, especially if the delay was not the lessee’s fault.
The State Government's order revising the commencement date of renewal of the mining lease was illegal, absurd, and a colourable exercise of power by the State violating the Petitioners' rights under....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of natural calamities and inaction by authorities, a party entitled to relief should be placed in the same position as if the wrong h....
Failure of lessee - Rule 29 of rules provide for payments to be made under said rules – Rule 29 lays down conditions subject to which quarrying leases are to be granted.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
