Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Rajasthan’s Mineral Concession Rules Amendments – Auction Process Deemed Constitutional

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the validity of the amendments made to the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986, introducing the auction process and rejecting pending applications for quarry licenses and mining leases. The judgment was delivered by a Bench of esteemed Justices on 1 August 2023.

 The apex court, in its verdict, stated, “There is no fundamental right of the applicants to carry on mining operations. They have no vested right to seek a lease or a license.” The Court emphasized that the applicants’ expectations were not legitimate rights and held that the amendments were well within the scope of the law.

 The legal challenge to the amendments was brought before the Supreme Court by aggrieved parties seeking to overturn the declaration of certain Rules as unconstitutional. However, the Court held that the power conferred by Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, allowed the State Government to introduce the auction process and reject pending applications.

 “The introduction of the auction process will bring transparency and efficiency in the allocation of mineral concessions,” the Court noted in its judgment. The decision is expected to streamline the allocation process and curb any potential malpractices.

 The Court further clarified that the applicants did not have a fundamental right in mining activities, and the State Government was entitled to introduce changes in the rules to promote better management of mineral resources.

 The ruling has significant implications for the mining industry in Rajasthan, as it validates the amendments aimed at improving resource allocation and promoting fair practices. The auction process is set to become the new norm for granting mineral concessions in the state.

 Industry experts have welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision, stating that it will foster a more competitive environment and attract investments in the mining sector. The judgment sets a precedent for other states to adopt similar measures in the interest of better governance and efficient utilization of mineral resources.

 With the apex court’s affirmation of the amendments’ constitutionality, Rajasthan’s mining sector is poised for a transformative shift, heralding a new era of transparency and accountability in the allocation of mineral concessions.

 D.D-1.Aug.2023

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. vs SHARWAN KUMAR KUMAWAT ETC.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/01-Aug-2023_State_Vs_Sharvan.pdf"]

Latest Legal News