Mineral Concession Rules, 1960

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., the lessee of a limestone mining lease granted by the Government of Maharashtra on 12‑Feb‑1980, challenged demand notices for Zilla Parishad (ZP) cess and Gram Panchayat (GP) cess for the years 1987‑1992. The appellant argued that Section 151(1) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat S…

The appellants, companies engaged in iron and steel production, entered into Memorandums of Understanding with the State Government of Jharkhand for mining leases of iron ore in the Ghatkuri area. The State Government recommended their applications to the Central Government for prior approval. However, upon discovering…

The case involved a reference to a nine-judge bench to resolve the divergence between India Cement Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu (which held royalty is a tax) and State of West Bengal v. Kesoram Industries Ltd. (which held royalty is not a tax). The core issues were the true nature of royalty under Section 9 of the Mines…

Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd. (BPSL) entered into a 2002 MOU with the Odisha State Government, which obliged the State to recommend iron‑ore mining leases for its steel plant. The Supreme Court, in a 2012 appeal, directed the State to act on the MOU for both the Thakurani and Keora areas. While the State complied for Thak…

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,…

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…

Tata Steel and its subsidiary TISCO operate captive coal mines in Jharkhand. The dispute concerned whether royalty under Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 should be levied on raw Run‑of‑Mine (ROM) coal extracted at the pit‑head or on the beneficiated coal removed from the leased…

The cement companies, claiming to be ryotwari pattadars, challenged a Tamil Nadu Government order that required them to pay full royalty and dead rent on mining leases, arguing they were entitled to a 50% concessional rate. The High Court had partially restrained the State from demanding royalty above 50% for patta lan…

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…

Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd. (appellant) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the State of Orissa on 15 May 2002, wherein the State agreed to recommend iron‑ore mining leases for the appellant’s integrated steel plant. After restructuring of the Bhushan group, the State claimed the MOU had ceased and dem…

The State of Gujarat entered into a 20‑year mining lease with the respondents for bauxite extraction. The State later de‑reserved the mining area and sought Central Government permission to impose conditions, including the establishment of a captive plant, under Rule 27(3) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. When th…

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…

The State of Rajasthan leased land to Hindustan Zinc Ltd. for extracting lead and zinc under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. The State issued notices demanding additional royalty, arguing that royalty should be payable on all metal extracted, including that remaining in tailings. Hindusta…

The petitioners, holders of jenmi rights in Malabar, Kerala, challenged the State's demand for royalties on minerals extracted from their lands, arguing that they owned the sub‑soil. The Kerala High Court held that the minerals belonged to the State and dismissed the writ petitions. On appeal, the Supreme Court examine…

The State of Kerala granted mining leases for beach‑sand minerals but later stayed them pending an environmental impact study and subsequently rejected the applications, citing its 2007 industrial policy that such minerals be exploited only by State or Central public‑sector undertakings. The respondents filed revision …

The petitioners, a mining leaseholder and its shareholder, challenged the explanations to Rule 38 of the Mineral (Other than Atomic and Hydrocarbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016 and Rule 45 of the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, 2017, alleging that the inclusion of previously paid royalty, DMF an…

M/s Kalinga Mining Corporation (appellant) challenged the grant of a mining lease to the legal heirs of the deceased Dr. Sarojini Pradhan (respondent No.10). The High Court had earlier allowed the substitution of the legal heirs, dismissed an SLP against that order, and later upheld the lease grant. The appellant argue…

The case involved a partnership firm (AMC) whose reconstitution in 2009 led the Director of Mines and Geology of Karnataka (the appellant) to issue Mineral Dispatch Permits (MDPs) to the new partners. The Central Bureau of Investigation alleged that the appellant acted without the prior State Government sanction requir…

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…

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…

The Supreme Court examined a series of appeals arising from the National Green Tribunal's (NGT) orders that banned rat‑hole coal mining in Meghalaya, directed the State to deposit Rs 100 crore for environmental restoration, and held that all coal extracted after May 2016 vested in the State. The Court held that the NGT…

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 original mining lease granted to Rajendra Nath Bhaskar was revoked after 13 years. Bhaskar died during the pendency of his challenge, and no substitution petition was filed by his heirs. The Madhya Pradesh High Court set aside the revocation but the lease expired, and the heirs later sought to continue mining for t…

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…