KRISHNADEVI MALCHAND KAMATHIA & ORS.versusBOMBAY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION GROUP & ORS.
2011 INSC 8531 January 2011Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined contempt applications arising from the appellants' (Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia & Ors.) alleged violation of a conditional order permitting them to repair an old bund on land classified as CRZ‑1 and notified as a reserve forest. The Court found that the appellants, under the pretext of repa…
GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
2014 INSC 6830 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed
Godrej & Boyce acquired a 133-acre parcel in Vikhroli, which was declared waste land and cultivated before 1951. The State later issued a show‑cause notice under Section 35(3) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (notice No. WT/53) in 1956‑57, but never served it or took possession, while repeatedly granting building permiss…
IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2021 INSC 79629 November 2021Directions issued
The Supreme Court examined the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation's (DMRC) request to proceed with Phase‑IV of the Mass Rapid Transit System (MRTS) through areas of the Delhi Ridge, South‑Central and Morphological Ridges, which are either notified forest or deemed forest lands. The petitioners argued that the project would c…
HANUMAN LAXMAN AROSKARversusUNION OF INDIA
2019 INSC 43429 March 2019Disposed off
The Union Government approved a greenfield international airport at Mopa, Goa, and the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) granted environmental clearance (EC) under the 2006 notification after the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) recommended it. Petitioners Hanuman Laxman Aroskar and the Federation of Rainbow W…
BINDU KAPUREAversusSUBHASHISH PANDA & ORS.
2025 INSC 78428 May 2025
The Supreme Court examined the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) unauthorised felling of over a thousand trees in the Delhi Ridge and its failure to disclose this during a hearing, despite pending applications for permission. The Court held that these actions amounted to wilful disobedience of its 1996 order in M.C. …
IN RE : T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2023 INSC 44228 April 2023Rejected
The Court was asked to clarify whether mining could be carried out beyond one kilometre from the boundary of a National Park or Wildlife Sanctuary when the proposed site lies within an Eco‑Sensitive Zone (ESZ). The petitioner argued that his mining lease, granted in 2005, was situated 2.26 km from the Radhanagari Wildl…
IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
2023 INSC 43026 April 2023Disposed off
The Union of India sought modification of the Supreme Court's directions dated 3 June 2022 that mandated a uniform one‑kilometre eco‑sensitive zone (ESZ) around every protected forest and prohibited any new permanent structures within such zones. The Court examined the practical difficulties of a uniform ESZ, the impac…
A. JOHN KENNEDY ETC.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS ETC.
2025 INSC 44324 March 2025Directions issued
The petitioners, displaced tea estate workers, and public interest litigants sought the removal of long‑standing encroachments and restoration of forest lands in the Agasthyamalai landscape, which includes the Singampatti Zamin forest leased to Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Limited for tea cultivation for over 95 ye…
IN RE: T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
2024 INSC 5924 January 2024Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined the challenge by the Goa Foundation to the criteria adopted by the State of Goa for identifying private forest land, specifically the canopy density threshold of 0.4 and a minimum area of 5 hectares. The Court traced the historical development of these criteria from the 1991 guidelines, the 1…
IN RE: ZUDPI JUNGLE LANDS versus
2025 INSC 75422 May 2025Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined the status of Zudpi Jungle lands in six districts of Maharashtra, which, although recorded as forest lands, have been used for residential, agricultural, and governmental purposes for decades. The State of Maharashtra sought to treat these lands as non‑forest to avoid the restrictions of the …
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. ETC. ETCversusUDAY EDUCATION AND WELFARE TRUST AND ANR. ETC
2022 INSC 113121 October 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Uttar Pradesh granted provisional licences to 1,215 wood‑based industries (WBIs) after an e‑lottery, relying on a timber‑availability assessment by the Forest Survey of India (FSI) under the 2016 Wood‑Based Industries Guidelines. The licences were challenged before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which …
NARINDER SINGH & ORS.versusDIVESH BHUTANI & ORS.
2022 INSC 73721 July 2022Disposed off
The case concerned several civil appeals and writ petitions challenging National Green Tribunal orders that restrained non‑forest activities on lands in three villages of Faridabad district, Haryana, on the ground that these lands were covered by special orders issued under Section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act…
B.S. SANDHUversusGOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS. & ETC.
2014 INSC 40121 May 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether land in village Karoran, notified under Section 3 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 and regulated by Sections 4 and 5, automatically qualifies as "forest land" under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The High Court had held that the entire 3,700‑acre village wa…
GOA FOUNDATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2014 INSC 96221 April 2014Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined public‑interest petitions concerning illegal iron‑ore mining in Goa, the validity of the Justice Shah Commission report, and the status of mining leases deemed to have arisen from pre‑1961 Portuguese concessions. It held that the Commission’s report could not be quashed for procedural lapses,…
SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.
2022 INSC 61120 May 2022Disposed off
The petitioners, environmental NGOs, filed a writ under Article 32 seeking a halt to mining in forest areas of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, declaration of illegal mining contracts, and removal of the ban on export of iron ore and pellets. The Supreme Court had earlier imposed a blanket ban on mining in Bellary, Chitra…
MAHANADI COAL FIELDS LTD. & ANR.versusMATHIAS ORAM & ORS.
2010 INSC 40919 July 2010Hearing Adjourned
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd., sought relief from an order of the Orissa High Court directing payment of compensation for lands acquired in 1987 under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957. The lands, belonging to tribal owners, had never been compensated despite the…
IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2024 INSC 99718 December 2024Directions issued
The Supreme Court considered an interlocutory application filed by environmental activist T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad seeking protection for the sacred groves, known as Orans, in Rajasthan. The Court examined the statutory framework, including the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (as amended in 2023), the Wildlife Protect…
ORISSA MINING CORPORATIONversusMINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT & FOREST & OTHERS
2013 INSC 26718 April 2013Disposed off
The Supreme Court considered a writ petition filed by Orissa Mining Corporation (OMC) seeking to quash the Ministry of Environment and Forests' (MoEF) order rejecting Stage‑II forest clearance for diversion of 660.749 hectares of forest land for a bauxite mining project in the Niyamgiri hills. The Court examined whethe…
SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARANATAKA & ORS.
2013 INSC 26518 April 2013Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined massive illegal iron‑ore mining in Karnataka’s Bellary, Tumkur and Chitradurga districts, which had caused severe forest loss and financial loss to the exchequer. A Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and a Court‑appointed Joint Team surveyed 166 mining leases, categorising them as A, B or C ba…
B.L.A. INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
2022 INSC 83817 August 2022
B.L.A. Industries Private Limited sought relief under Article 32, contending that it had not been allocated a coal block through the illegal Screening Committee process that the Supreme Court had struck down in the Manohar Lal Sharma judgments. The petitioner had applied for a mining lease to the Madhya Pradesh State G…
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMR. SUDHAKAR HEGDE & ORS.
2020 INSC 30317 March 2020Disposed off
The Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) sought an environmental clearance (EC) for its Peripheral Ring Road (PRR) project, which was later quashed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on the ground that the primary data used in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report was over three years old and the Terms of…
STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERSversusESSAR OIL LIMITED AND ANOTHER
2012 INSC 3417 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Gujarat introduced a Capital Investment Incentive Scheme offering sales‑tax deferment to new industrial units that had to commence commercial production by a prescribed date. Essar Oil Ltd, a premier unit, was delayed in starting production because the Gujarat High Court, in several public‑interest litigat…
CITIZENS FOR GREEN DOONversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
2021 INSC 74016 November 2021Disposed off
The petitioners, Citizens for Green Dehradun, challenged Stage‑I forest clearances for a highway project and were directed by the Supreme Court to approach the National Green Tribunal (NGT). They filed an original application before the NGT under Section 14, which was dismissed on the ground that they were circumventin…
COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS
2014 INSC 97516 May 2014Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined illegal mining in Odisha where numerous leaseholders were operating without environmental or forest clearances and without renewal under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. The Central Empowered Committee identified 102 non‑working leases, 29 rejected or lapsed leas…
THE AUROVILLE FOUNDATIONversusNAVROZ KERSASP MODY & ORS
2025 INSC 34716 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The Auroville Foundation appealed against the National Green Tribunal's (NGT) directions that required it to prepare a new township plan and to obtain environmental clearance before completing the Crown Road and other roads in Auroville, alleging that the Tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction. The respondents, residen…
HANUMAN LAXMAN AROOSKARversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2020 INSC 4916 January 2020Disposed off
The Union of India sought a direction that the minutes of the 40th meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) dated 23 April 2019 be placed on record so that the Supreme Court's embargo on the environmental clearance (EC) for the Mopa greenfield airport could be lifted. The Court examined whether the EAC had adequ…
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.versusM/S. KUMAON STONE CRUSHER
2017 INSC 91215 September 2017Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals concerning the levy of transit fees on forest produce under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. It held that crushing stone boulders into grits, marble slabs, limestone, coal and related minerals does not change their character as forest produce, and that the Forest Act and its 19…
IN RE: CONSTRUCTION OF MULTI STOREYED BUILDINGS IN FOREST LAND MAHARASHTRA versus
2025 INSC 70115 May 2025
The case concerned 11.89 ha of land in Kondhwa Budruk, Pune, notified as Reserved Forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1878, which was later allotted to the Chavan family in 1998 for agricultural purposes without Central Government approval under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. The Chavan family subsequently sold the…
CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT LAW, WWF-1versusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
2013 INSC 25415 April 2013Case Allowed
The Court examined a petition seeking direction to relocate the critically endangered Asiatic lion from its sole habitat in Gir, Gujarat, to Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh, as a second home for long‑term survival. Scientific studies by the Wildlife Institute of India and the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) …
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.versusJANTHAKAL ENTERPRISES AND ANR.
2011 INSC 29915 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by the State of Karnataka and other authorities against the Karnataka High Court’s order permitting Janthakal Enterprises to lift 1,17,800 tonnes of dumped ore. The Court held that the High Court had erred by disposing of a writ petition involving disputed factual issues in f…
CITIZENS FOR GREEN DOON & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2021 INSC 88514 December 2021Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined the Chardham Mahamarg Vikas Pariyojna, a project to widen about 900 km of national highways in the Himalayan state of Uttarakhand, which includes three strategic border roads. Environmental groups challenged the project before the National Green Tribunal, leading to the formation of a High Po…
RAUNAQ EDUCATION FOUNDATIONversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
2014 INSC 72514 October 2014Dismissed
The Raunaq Education Foundation was allotted 76 acres of forest land by the State of Haryana in 1972 for establishing an educational complex, subject to conditions of timely construction. The foundation failed to develop the school for decades, prompting the Gram Panchayat to seek return of the land, leading to a resum…
N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
2014 INSC 18214 September 2018IA disposed
The petitioners, led by MLA Bhupesh Baghel, sought interlocutory relief to stop non‑forest activities, including mining, by licensee Anil Lunia in Chhattisgarh forests, to initiate criminal prosecution, order a CBI enquiry, recover compensation and enforce afforestation. The Supreme Court constituted a Central Empowere…
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT) NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusAAM AADMI LOKMANCH & ORS.
2020 INSC 45214 July 2020Disposed off
The case arose from a tragic landslide on a National Highway caused by over‑mining and hill‑cutting, which killed a woman and her daughter. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) had ordered the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and the miner to pay a joint penalty, compensation to the victims' heirs and to fund a…
ALAKNANDA HYDRO POWER CO. LTD.versusANUJ JOSHI & ORS.
2013 INSC 53513 August 2013Disposed off
The Srinagar Hydro Electric Project (SHEP) in Uttarakhand, originally cleared environmentally in 1985 and forest‑cleared in 1987, was later transferred to Alaknanda Hydro Power Co. Ltd. (AHPCL) with a capacity increase to 330 MW. Petitioners challenged the validity of the clearances and sought a public hearing under th…
COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2017 INSC 70012 November 2018IA disposed
The Supreme Court examined the legality of Sarda Mines Private Limited’s (SMPL) mining operations after it received a permission on 13 July 1999 to extract 1.4 LTPA of mineral iron ore and an environmental clearance on 22 September 2004 for expanding production of iron ore (lump) to 4.0 MTPA. The Court held that the 20…
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHERversusM/S. CHIRANJILAL (MINERAL) INDUSTRIES OF BAGANDIH AND ANOTHER
2023 INSC 82412 September 2023Case Partly allowed
The State of West Bengal appealed against a High Court order directing the execution of a mining lease for dolomite to M/s. Chiranjilal (Mineral) Industries (the respondent). The dispute centered on whether the respondent's 1998 application for a mining lease remained eligible under the Mines and Minerals (Development …
M/S. MUNEER ENTERPRISESversusM/S RAMGAD MINERALS AND MINING LTD. & ORS.
2015 INSC 20912 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed
The case concerned the mining lease M.L. No.2010 granted to Mis. Dalmia Cements (Bharat) Ltd for forest land in Karnataka. Mis. Dalmia surrendered the lease in stages, culminating in a letter dated 27 March 2001 and the surrender of the lease book on 16 June 2001, which was accepted by the Director of Mines and Geology…
T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2014 INSC 18212 March 2014Disposed off
The Supreme Court disposed of several interlocutory applications filed by various States seeking greater releases from the Ad‑hoc Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA). The Court modified its earlier order of July 2009, directing the National CAMPA Advisory Council (NCAC) to issue gu…
HIMACHAL PRADESH BUS STAND MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HPBSM & DA)versusTHE CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE ETC. & ORS.
2021 INSC 1812 January 2021Disposed off
The Himachal Pradesh Bus Stand Management and Development Authority (HPBSM&DA) obtained a 99‑year lease on forest land that had been diverted for a parking space and a bus stand under Forest (Conservation) Act orders of 1997 and 2001. It then authorised a private contractor to construct a Bus Stand‑cum‑Parking Complex …
MAHARASHTRA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
2010 INSC 76811 November 2010Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined whether a 53‑acre portion of Survey No. 345‑A in Dahisar was a "private forest" under the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975 on the appointed day of 30 August 1975, and whether the State’s acquisition of that land was proportionate and lawful. The Court held that the land was…
M.C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2018 INSC 80411 September 2018IA disposed
The Supreme Court examined whether land in Kant Enclave, notified under the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLP) on 18 August 1992, should be treated as forest land and thus subject to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. It held that the notification unequivocally designates the area as forest, rendering any constructio…
SAMAJ PARIVARTAN SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA &ORS.
2012 INSC 23011 May 2012Hearing Adjourned
The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Samaj Parivartan Samuday alleging continued illegal mining of iron ore in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, despite earlier orders and a CBI charge‑sheet. The Court considered reports of a Central Empowered Committee (CEC) that identified irregularities, including land de…
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERSversusYOGENDERA MOHAN SENGUPTA AND ANOTHER
2024 INSC 3011 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Himachal Pradesh prepared a draft development plan for the Shimla Planning Area under the Himachal Pradesh Town & Country Planning Act, 1977, which was stayed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in 2014 and again in 2022. The State challenged the NGT orders before the Himachal Pradesh High Court, while th…
ELECTROSTEEL STEELS LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC
2021 INSC 8599 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed
Electrosteel Steels Ltd. obtained environmental clearance (EC) and consent to establish a steel plant at a specified site in Bokaro, but later shifted the plant 5.3 km away, allegedly encroaching forest land. The Ministry of Environment and the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board (JSPCB) revoked the EC, leading the…
ROHAN VIJAY NAHAR & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
2025 INSC 12967 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, private landowners in Maharashtra, challenged revenue annotations and mutation entries that labelled their lands as private forests and vested in the State, arguing that the statutory requirements for acquisition were not fulfilled. The State contended that notices issued under Section 35(3) of the Indi…
THE GOA FOUNDATIONversusM/S SESA STERLITE LTD. & ORS.
2018 INSC 1107 February 2018Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined the State of Goa's grant of second renewals of mining leases after illegal mining was uncovered. It held that the earlier *Goa Foundation* judgment required the State to grant fresh mining leases, not renewals, and that the High Court erred in directing execution of lease deeds under Section …
LAFARGE UMIAM MINING PVT. LTD. T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2011 INSC 4616 July 2011Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined Lafarge Umiam Mining Pvt. Ltd.'s limestone mining project in East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya, where the company had obtained environmental clearance in 2001 based on a certificate stating the land was not forest. Subsequent inspections by forest officials in 2006‑2007 identified forest cover, lea…
IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2024 INSC 1786 March 2024Directions issued
The Supreme Court examined whether tiger safaris can be treated like zoos under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and whether the proposed tiger safari at Pakhrau in Corbett Tiger Reserve was lawful. It held that a zoo, as defined in s.2(39), is an ex‑situ conservation establishment and tiger safaris, as envisioned b…
STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.versusM/S MESCO STEELS LTD. & ANR.
2013 INSC 1386 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Orissa granted a mining lease to MESCO Steels Ltd. for iron ore, but later a Director of Mines issued an intra‑departmental communication recommending reduction of the lease area due to overlapping claims and forest land. The State then issued a show‑cause notice to MESCO, which the company challenged in a…
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2014 INSC 9016 January 2014Disposed off
The petitioners sought compliance with the Supreme Court's order in Lafarge Umiam Mining Private Limited v. Union of India, which directed the Central Government to appoint a National Regulator under Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for independent appraisal and monitoring of environmental clearan…
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA
2011 INSC 3565 May 2011Dismissed
The appellant held a lease of 75 acres of land within the East Aletty Reserved Forest, originally granted in 1949 for areca nut cultivation. The lease expired in 1999-2000 and the appellant sought renewal, but the Karnataka State Government refused, citing the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and concerns that extending t…
COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
2017 INSC 7004 April 2016
The Supreme Court examined whether mining leaseholders, whose operations were suspended for lack of environmental clearances, retained a subsisting right to mine. It held that a lease remains subsisting unless a State Government order declares it lapsed, and that the lease period may be deemed extended under Rule 24A(6…
M/S. SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPN. LTD.versusS. JOEL & ORS.
2019 INSC 2334 February 2019Disposed off
The Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWAD Board) was granted permission to divert 0.055 hectares of forest land for a drinking‑water intake. It later used the water for industrial purposes, prompting a petition before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) which ordered that the water be used only for drinking pu…
IN RE.: CONSTRUCTION OF PARK AT NOIDA NEAR OKHLA BIRD SANCTUARY ANAND ARYA & ANR. T.N. B GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2010 INSC 8443 December 2010Disposed off
The petitioners challenged the construction of a large memorial park in Noida, alleging that the 33.43‑hectare site was forest land and that the project proceeded without the required prior environmental clearance under the 2006 EIA Notification, thereby threatening the nearby Okhla Bird Sanctuary. The Court examined r…
STATE OF U.P. & ANR.versusNORTHERN COAL FIELDS
2024 INSC 9483 October 2024Dismissed
The State of Uttar Pradesh sought to recover annual lease rent from Northern Coal Fields Ltd., a government company, for forest land transferred for mining under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957. The land had been acquired by the Central Government in 1981 under s.10(1) of the Act and subs…
IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
2022 INSC 6353 June 2022Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined applications arising from a Central Empowered Committee (CEC) report on illegal mining in Jamua Ramgarh wildlife sanctuary, Rajasthan, and the broader issue of eco‑sensitive zones (ESZ) around protected forests. It affirmed that the State must act as a trustee of natural resources under the P…
COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
2017 INSC 7002 August 2017Directions issued
The Supreme Court examined a massive illegal mining scandal in Odisha involving 187 iron and manganese ore leases, many of which operated without environmental or forest clearances, exceeded mining plans, or violated statutory provisions. The Court rejected the lease‑holders' claim that the Justice M.B. Shah Commission…
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusSHARWAN KUMAR KUMAWAT ETC. ETC
2023 INSC 6611 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Rajasthan challenged the constitutional validity of sub‑rule (10) of Rule 4 and sub‑rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986, which rejected pending applications for minor‑mineral leases and introduced an auction‑based allocation. The appellants argued that the High Court er…
K. GURUPRASAD RAOversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS
2013 INSC 3971 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court heard a public‑interest writ petition seeking the cancellation of a mining lease and a ban on mining within one kilometre of the 16th‑century Jambunatha Temple, a protected monument in Karnataka. The petition challenged mining activities that were alleged to have caused structural damage to the temple…