No bar on movement of minerals extracted in Goa before cut-off date, says SC

Bench gives companies a six-month window to transport the minerals for which they had paid royalty

January 30, 2020 09:41 pm | Updated 09:41 pm IST - NEW DELHI

The Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that its 2018 ban on mining operations in Goa does not bar private mining companies from transporting out whatever minerals they had extracted before the cut-off date of March 15, 2018.

A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde gave the companies a six-month window to transport the minerals for which they had paid royalty. It assured NGO Goa Foundation that the State government would keep a close watch and ensure that miners moved only minerals extracted prior to March 15, 2018.

This litigation stems from a February 7, 2018 apex court judgment pronounced by a Bench led by Justice (now retired) Madan B. Lokur. It quashed all 88 mining leases renewed by the BJP government in Goa in 2015 to “benefit private mining leaseholders”.

The 2018 verdict noted how these leases were hastily renewed by the State in 2014 with retrospective effect from 2007, just in the nick of time before an amended Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act made auction of leases mandatory to mine notified minerals like iron ore. It condemned the role played by the Goa government in the loot of natural resources.

The court had said private entrepreneurs were given mining leases “virtually for a song”. It found that some of the private miners even owed the State staggering sums of up to Rs. 1500 crore “towards value of ore extracted in excess of the environmental clearance”. Quashing their licences, the court, however, gave the miners time till March 15, 2018 to wind up the operations.

On Thursday, Chief Justice Bobde, who wrote the judgment, concluded that “this court in [2018 judgment] had intended to prohibit the mining as well as transportation of minerals and iron or with effect from March 16.2018 nothing precluded it from doing so".

He said, “The only prohibition is for carrying out mining operations”. He reasoned that there was no doubt that the ownership of the ore was that of the party that had raised the ore. “The ore which has been permitted to be transported is on condition of payment of royalty. We see no reason why the owners should not be allowed to transport their own ore”.

The court gave clear directions to the State that the transportation of the mineral would be only in respect of such minerals on which royalty is paid.

“The mining leaseholders would be permitted to transport the royalty paid ore/mineral from the jetties/stockyard or pitheads on the basis of the valid transit permits issued to them by the competent authority of the State government”, the court ordered.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.