Summary
In the continuing Karnataka mining proceedings, the Court ordered expert demarcation of seven B-1 leases, review of production and sales regulation, and completion of outstanding rehabilitation plans. It retained the ten per cent restoration contribution at this stage and directed recovery of rehabilitation costs from the responsible former or existing lessees. NMDC’s post-2018 contribution remained ten per cent, with excess refundable. Numerous applications received separate procedural outcomes; the main mining proceedings and production-ceiling application remained pending.
Issues
- How the seven border-area leases should be surveyed and demarcated.
- Whether production restrictions and sales regulation required reassessment.
- Whether the restoration contribution should cease and how missing rehabilitation plans should be completed.
- What separate outcomes applied to NMDC and the other applications.
Provisions considered
- Article 32; continuing environmental proceedings, Constitution of IndiaThe Court continued supervision through expert surveys, rehabilitation obligations, funding and reports, while retaining unresolved applications and disposing of other matters separately. (¶¶ 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 27, 28, 32, 96, 97, 98, 99, 110, 111)
Held
- NIT Karnataka was to survey the seven identified B-1 leases using total-station methods and satellite imagery, with cooperation of the two States’ Joint Team. Jointly signed reports were to be furnished to the States and Court within six months. After notice to lessees, the CEC was to pass orders, including for expired leases, and report within seven months, with Monitoring Committee participation and Karnataka entitled to raise objections. (¶¶ 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
- Individual maximum permissible annual production reflected mineral reserves, available dumping space and transport capacity. If aggregate production exceeded the binding district ceiling, lease-level limits required pro-rata reduction. The Court continued those parameters and directed a comprehensive expert review of caps, possible local sub-caps, sales regulation including e-auctions and satellite monitoring, with a report within four months. The production application was not finally decided. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32)
- The ten per cent contribution toward environmental restoration was not discontinued merely because substantial funds had accumulated. Implementation of the provisionally approved plan remained at an early stage, objections remained under consideration and outstanding rehabilitation work required attention. (¶¶ 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96)
- Karnataka’s Principal Chief Conservator was to survey Category C mines lacking required rehabilitation data or plans, obtain expert assistance and arrange preparation, with interim costs met from the special-purpose vehicle. Implementation would proceed through KMERC or another agency with the required Court involvement. The directions also covered Category A and B deficiencies. Costs were recoverable as land-revenue arrears from the appropriate former or existing lessees and payable into the vehicle, with no refund to new lessees. (¶¶ 97, 98, 99)
- NMDC’s request to reduce the contribution for the period before the end of 2018 was rejected. From 1 January 2019 its rate remained ten per cent; any amount collected above that rate was to be refunded by the Monitoring Committee within six weeks. (¶¶ 64, 65, 66, 92)
- Applications 232/2014, 124132/2022 and 21884/2020 were retained for reports; several others were dismissed as infructuous, withdrawn or in default. Application 208/2014 was disposed of without merits findings, preserving recourse before the appropriate forum and continuing its stay for two months. Application 212/2014 was not examined on merits, with conditional liberty concerning the relevant notification. (¶¶ 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 55, 56, 57, 58, 61, 62, 63, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 78, 79)
- The requested reclassification from Category C to B was refused in the specified impleadment and directions applications. Other identified applications seeking relief were also dismissed or disposed of as stated in their individual operative paragraphs; these outcomes did not terminate the continuing main writ proceedings. (¶¶ 67, 68, 69, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108)
- Writ Petition 505/2020 was dismissed because the lease had expired. Liberty to challenge the fresh auction according to law was preserved without expressing any view on that challenge. Pending applications in that writ petition were disposed of. (¶¶ 109, 110, 111, 112)
Result
Directions issued for surveys, regulatory review, rehabilitation and cost recovery; ten per cent restoration contribution retained at this stage. Individual applications disposed of or retained as specified; Writ Petition 505/2020 dismissed with auction-challenge liberty. Main mining proceedings and production-ceiling application remained pending.