Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2014 (8) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2014 (8) TMI 1170 - SC - Indian Laws


Issues Involved:

1. Non-compliance with mandatory legal procedures under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
2. Breach of Section 3(3)(a)(iii) of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973.
3. Violation of the principle of Trusteeship of natural resources.
4. Arbitrariness, lack of transparency, lack of objectivity, and non-application of mind.
5. Allotment tainted with mala fides and corruption.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Non-compliance with mandatory legal procedures under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957:

The Court highlighted that the 1957 Act provides for general restrictions on undertaking prospecting and mining operations, the procedure for obtaining prospecting licenses or mining leases, and the rule-making power for regulating the grant of such licenses and leases. The Court found that the allocation of coal blocks by the Central Government did not adhere to the procedures and mandates of the 1957 Act. It was noted that the Central Government's role is preeminent in the 1957 Act, but this does not give it the authority to act inconsistently with the Act's provisions. The Central Government's allocation process lacked statutory backing and was not in line with the legal regime established by the 1957 Act.

2. Breach of Section 3(3)(a)(iii) of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973:

The Court observed that Section 3(3)(a)(iii) of the CMN Act restricts coal mining operations to the Central Government, its companies, and corporations, and companies engaged in specific end-uses like iron and steel production, power generation, and cement production. The Court found that many private companies allocated coal blocks were not engaged in these specified end-uses at the time of allocation, thus violating the CMN Act. Additionally, the Court found that the allocation process allowed State PSUs to mine coal for commercial purposes, which is not permitted under the CMN Act.

3. Violation of the principle of Trusteeship of natural resources:

The Court emphasized that natural resources are held by the State in trust for the people and must be allocated in a manner that subserves the common good. The Court found that the allocation process did not meet this principle. The process was arbitrary, lacked transparency, and did not ensure that the benefits of coal resources were distributed equitably. The Court noted that the allocation process led to windfall gains for private companies at the expense of the public exchequer.

4. Arbitrariness, lack of transparency, lack of objectivity, and non-application of mind:

The Court found that the Screening Committee's process for allocating coal blocks was arbitrary and lacked transparency and objectivity. The guidelines for allocation were inconsistent and varied from meeting to meeting. There was no proper evaluation of the merits of the applicants, and the process was subjective. The Screening Committee's decisions were often based on incomplete or incorrect information, and there was no consistent application of criteria for evaluating the applicants. The Court also noted that the allocation process did not involve any competitive bidding, which could have ensured transparency and fairness.

5. Allotment tainted with mala fides and corruption:

The Court found that the allocation process was tainted with mala fides and corruption. The Screening Committee's recommendations often favored certain companies without any objective basis. The process allowed for the allocation of coal blocks to companies that were not eligible under the CMN Act, and there were instances of misrepresentation and manipulation by the applicants. The Court noted that the allocation process led to significant losses to the public exchequer and benefited a few private companies unfairly.

Conclusion:

The Court held that the entire allocation of coal blocks from 1993 to 2010 was illegal and unconstitutional. The process was arbitrary, lacked transparency, and violated statutory provisions. The Court directed that the allocations made through the Screening Committee route and the Government dispensation route be quashed. The Court also emphasized that the allocation of coal blocks should be done through a fair, transparent, and competitive process to ensure that the benefits of natural resources are distributed equitably and in the public interest.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates