##PAGE1##

$~6

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 19814/2025

M/S VEDANTA LIMITED .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, Senior Adv. with

Mr. Naveen Kumar, AOR, Mr.

Ujjawal Kumar Rai, Mr. Lakshay

Singh and Mr. Sudhanshu Pathak,

Advs.

versus

THE NOMINATED AUTHORITY MINISTRY OF COAL

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents

Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R

% 26.12.2025

1. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-

“a. Pass any appropriate order/direction for setting aside

the Communication bearing no. NA-104/8/2020-NA dated

15.12.2025 issued by the Nominated Authority, Ministry of

Coal, Government of India, whereby the Respondent no. 1

has initiated the process of Termination of the CMDP

Agreement dated 11.01.2021; AND/OR

b. Pass any appropriate order and/or direction setting aside

the Minutes of the meeting dated 13.09.2024 of the 24th

Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 08.08.2024, whereby

the 24th Scrutiny Committee held that the Petitioner should

have operationalized the mine by 03.06.2025 irrespective of

the fact that application seeking forest clearance is still

pending before the authorities; AND/OR

c. Pass any appropriate order and/or direction setting aside

the Order bearing no. NA-104/8/2020-NA dated 10.09.2025

passed by the Respondent No. 1, rejecting the Request of the

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 18:22:15

Petitioner to change in Zero date for Radhikapur (West)

Coal Mine; AND/OR

d. Pass any appropriate order and/or direction to set aside

the Minutes of the Meeting dated 05.12.2025 of the meeting

held on 02.12.2025, to the extent that the Respondents have

held that delays are attributable to the Petitioner and had

observed that there is no justification for allowing a reset of

timelines on account of “forest-like growth’ or boundary-

related matters; AND/OR

e. Pass any Order or direction to extend the timeline for

achieving efficiency parameters and amend the zero dates in

view of the development subsequent to the execution of the

CMDPA and Vesting Order including the letter dated

11.07.2025 issued by the DFO, Angul; AND/OR

f. Pass any order or direction to restraint the Respondent

from taking any coercive steps or further appropriations

pursuant to the impugned order; AND/OR

g. Pass ad interim stay in the nature of restraining the

Respondents from taking any coercive, precipitative or any

adverse action against the Petitioner during the pendency of

the Present Petition;”

2. Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that in the present petition, the petitioner is essentially

aggrieved by the action of the Nominated Authority of the Ministry of

Coal/Union of India, inasmuch as despite the interim stay granted by this

court, the respondent has rushed to initiate the process of termination of the

allocation of coal block.

3. Elaborating on his submission, Mr. Gupta has handed over a copy of

the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.07.2025 passed in WP(C)

10686/2025, the same is taken on record. He submits that the petitioner was

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 18:22:15

constrained to file the said writ petition, WP(C) 10686/2025 as the Nominated Authority had

earlier given directions to the Branch Manager, SBI, VKC Branch, Mumbai

to appropriate an amount of Rs. 292,35,51,176.82/- from the performance

bank guarantee number 1637622BG0000209 dated 15.06.2025.

4. He submits that the learned Single Judge vide order dated 23.07.2025

had directed the respondents to maintain ‘status quo’ with regard to the

aforesaid performance bank guarantee. Subsequently, the said writ petiti