Bombay High Court rejects Goa miner’s bid to revive lease despite Supreme Court ban, imposes ₹5 lakh costs

The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court has imposed ₹5 lakh costs on a Goa mining company, Shantilal Khushaldas & Brothers Private Limited, while dismissing its plea to revive an old mining lease [Shantilal Khushaldas & Brothers Pvt Ltd v. State of Goa].In a judgment delivered on May 8, a Division Bench of Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit S Jamsandekar said the issue had already been settled by the Supreme Court in Goa Foundation v. Union of India, which held that old Goa mining leases ended on November 22, 2007 and mining after that date was illegal.The Court was, however, told by the company that its case was different because the Goa government had specifically agreed in 2007 to renew its lease subject to environmental clearances and therefore, the Supreme Court ruling did not apply to it.The High Court rejected this contention and said the Supreme Court’s earlier rulings also applied to cases where renewal approvals may have been granted, but no final lease deed was executed.“In any event, we are of the considered opinion that the Judgment which was rendered by the Supreme Court in GF-I covers even cases where orders to extend a lease may have been passed, but a lease agreement had not been executed,” the High Court said..The Court also criticised the company for remaining silent for years after obtaining the 2007 order and approaching the High Court only in 2016.It noted that despite claiming renewal of the lease, the company never took steps to seek execution of a final lease deed in its favour, and offered no explanation for the delay..The plea filed by Shantilal Khushaldas & Brothers Pvt Ltd sought revival of its old Goa mining lease. The company challenged government orders passed in 2013 and 2015, which declared that its lease had ended on November 22, 2007. It also asked the High Court to declare that its mining rights continued till 2020 under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act)..The lease was originally granted during Portuguese rule and later became a deemed mining lease under Indian law after Goa’s liberation. The lease expired in 1987, after which the company repeatedly tried to get it renewed.In 2007, the Goa government said renewal could be granted subject to environmental clearances, which the company later obtained after which it worked the mine in the year 2010 and 2011 and paid royalty to the State for that period.However, after the Supreme Court suspended mining operations in Goa in the illegal mining matter linked to the Justice Shah Commission Report, the Goa Director of Mines and Geology in 2013 declared the company’s lease had lapsed from November 22, 2007.After the revisional authority under the Ministry of Mines also rejected its challenge in 2015, the company approached the High Court..Before the High Court, Senior Advocate Subodh Kantak, appearing for the company, argued that the State government’s 2007 decision to renew the lease made its case different from other Goa mining leases covered by the Supreme Court ruling.On the other hand, Advocate General Devidas Pangam contended that the issue had already been conclusively settled by the Supreme Court, which held that all old Goa mining leases stood exhausted by November 22, 2007 and mining after that date was illegal..The Bench rejected the company’s argument. It said that the State government’s willingness to renew the lease did not create any valid mining rights since no final lease deed was ever executed in the company’s favour."There was no lease executed thereafter in favour of the Petitioner even though it obtained the EC clearance on 02.03.2009. Till date, and even at the time the GF-I Judgment was rendered, no renewed lease was executed in favour of the Petitioner," the High Court addedThe Court also said the Supreme Court rulings also covered pending and incomplete renewals. Thus, it concluded that no mining rights survived after 2007 and dismissed the petition with ₹5 lakh costs..[Read Judgment]