Mining and Jurisprudence: Observations for India’s mining sector to improve

A key reason for the Court’s decision on lifting the ban was the effect of 15 Reports of the Shah Commission on illegal mining in the State of Goa, as accessed from Shah Commission Inquiry Archives of the Ministry of Mines, Government of India 16 Supreme Court of India, Judgement dated April 21, 2014, in the matter of Goa Foundation Vs. [...] The leases were functioning based on the pretext of the “deemed extension” clause under the Mineral Concession (MC) Rules, 1960, which is a violation, noted the Court.30 The bench clarified that the deemed extension clause the MC Rules is not available for the second and subsequent renewals of a mining lease. [...] Also, in cases where “a leaseholder whose original lease has since expired, would have a subsisting lease, if the original lease has been renewed and the renewal period is in currency”.34 To assess the “subsistence” status of the suspended leases in question, the Court drew upon the amendments introduced to the MMDR Act in 2015 (after the passage of the last interim order). [...] It was underscored that the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act of 1996 (PESA), that recognizes the power of local level institutions- (gram sabhas) in matters of governance, “has been enacted to provide for the extension of the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution relating to Panchayats to the Scheduled Areas. [...] As it has been noted, the holder of a mining lease is required to adhere to the terms of the mining scheme, the mining plan, as well as the statutes such as the Environment Protection Act (1986), the Forest Conservation Act (1980), the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act (1974) and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act (1981).