Keonjhar | April 05, 2016: Supreme Court of India has given reasons for the Miners to smile, by clearing the path to implement MMDR Amendment Act 2015 which came into force w.e.f 12January last year. After hearing the parties for two consecutive full days in the month of March this year, in a Writ Petition ( No.114/2014 ) filed by an NGO, Common Cause represented by Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan, a division bench of apex court, comprising Justice Sri J.S. Keher and justice Sri C.Nagappan , has pronounced a remarkable judgement on 4 April 2016 . The apex court has held that leases granted prior to 12.01.2015 ,which are either subsiding or renewed or, for which the lease period or renewal period have expired and renewal applications have been filed as per law , as on 12 Jan 2015 ( ie the date on which MMDR Ordinance 2015 came into force ) are eligible for extension of lease period at least up to 2030 ( for captive mines ) or 2020 (for non-captive). Leases which have not exhausted their first renewal period can even go beyond 2020 or 2030 as the case may be.
The Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation ) Amendment Ordinance 2015 was promulgated on 12 January 2015. Subsequently the ordinance was enacted by Parliament as “ the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation ) Amendment Act 2015 ( in short MMDR Amendment Act 2015) in place of MMDR Act 1957. Sec -8A of the amended Act of 2015 provides 3 important concepts namely (i) Leases granted prior to 12 Jan 2015 , shall be deemed to have been granted for a period of 50 years from the date of grant (ii) Leases to be granted after 12 Jan 2015 , shall be granted only through auction , (iii) leases which are under 2nd or subsequent renewal , shall be and are deemed to have been extended till 31.3.2030 ( for captive) or 31.3.2020 (for non-captive ) or for period of 50 years from the date of grant ,or till the expiry of last renewal ( if any) period whichever is later . Under Sec 8A(9) of the Act, it is provided that above benefit shall not be available to a leases whose renewal application has been rejected/ lease has been lapsed / or lease has been determined by State Govt , prior to 12 Jan 2015. It is also provided in the Act that , benefits (extensions) under Sec 8A(5) and 8A(6) is subject to conditions that all the conditions of lease have been complied with .
After promulgation of the above Ordinance; and even after enactment of MMDR Amendment Act 2015 , State of Odisha was not implementing the said act and parties had moved to High Court . After direction of High Court of Orissa , the State Govt of Odisha had extended some leases and were in process of extending some more leases in the state. In the mean time the matter in WP (C) No.114/2014 filed by the NGO , M/s Common Cause, came up before the Apex court .
Lessees whose operations were suspended by State Govt and the Apex Court ( by its order dated 16.5.14 ) have moved applications before Apex court for modification of order dated 16.5.16 of and to allow them for operation as they have obtained statutory clearances . While the court was to consider those applications , Prashant Bhushan, the counsel for Common Cause ( petitioner) and the Amicus to CEC , Mr AND Rao had raised vague issues and misconceptions , and prayed the court not to allow extension of leases which are not subsiting as on 12 Jan 2015 , in terms of either valid lease or a renewed lease. They also misled the court saying that the leases which were not in operation for a continuous period of more than two years , are to be treated as lapsed automatically , and extension should not be considered at all .
The apex court have rejected the misconceived and misleading contentions of the petitioner and the Amicus of CEC and pronounced a clear and transparent judgment which has put an end to all misinterpretation of the amended MMDR Act.
According to the judgment of apex court, all the leases granted prior to 12 Jan 2015 are now deemed to have been granted for 50 years from the grant. The leases which are under second and subsequent renewals ( either renewed or Renewal applications pending ) are deemed to have been extended up to 31.3.2030 ( captive mines ) or 31.3.2020 ( non-captive mines ) , or till expiry of period of last renewal made, or for a period of fifty years, which ever is farthest.
Regarding lapsing, the court held that , lapsing can not be automatic , unless an order is passed by State Govt and communicated to the lessee. So, lapsing can not be a ground to deny the benefit of Sec- 8A of the new Act, unless an order to that effect has been passed by State Govt prior to 12 Jan 2015.
Similarly, for “the conditions to be complied with” as contemplated in the Act, the petitioner and the Amicus had contended that if a lessee has ever violated any of the lease conditions/ rules , he/she shall not be entitle to have the benefit of sec 8A of the Act. The Apex court has also dealt this carefully and clarified that a lease would be entitle to operate the mines subject to condition that it has all the statutory clearances ( eg, FC & EC ) , Approvals ( eg Mining Plan & progressive Mine closure plan ) and Consent ( Consent to operate by State Pollution Control Board) as because all other violations/ irregularities (if any) are dealt under appropriate statues .
It is pertinent to mention that, State Govt of Jharkhand had done a gross misinterpretation of the new act and had rejected almost all the leases in the State denying extension under Sec 8A of the Act. It had also taken the stand that , non -operation of mines for a period of two years would result in automatic lapse of a lease under Sec 4A(4) of the MMDR Act 1957 , hence such leases were not eligible for extension under the provisions of new Act. The State of Jharkhand had formed a committee to carry out post facto investigation ( like post mortem ) of the violations committed by lessees since inception /grant , to deny the benefit of Sec 8A of the new Act. Interestingly , the State Govt of Jharkhand after rejecting the leases , had resorted to take possession of such leases without even following the procedures to over possession .
Now this order dated 4.4.16 of Apex court has brought in new life to leases which were arbitrarily rejected by State of Jharkhand also.
(Source: http://www.orissadiary.com/)