PANJIM: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notices to the Goa government and to mining lease holders, seeking an explanation over the second renewal of 88 iron ore mining leases done under Section 8(3) of the Mines and Minerals Development Regulation (MMDR) Act 1957.
A bench headed by Justice J S Khehar, has reserved the matter challenging renewals of mining leases, for disposal and final judgment on December 9. Goa Foundation and social activist Sudip Tamankar had filed two Writ Petitions (WP) before the Apex Court challenging the State’s renewal of 88 mining leases and revoking the suspension of environmental clearances (ECs) given to 72 mining leases which had been kept in abeyance. Clubbed to this were two Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) challenging the High Court decision to allow renewal of leases.
The notices seek responses on the WPs by December 1. The State will have to submit lease-wise details of renewals granted, while Goa Foundation has to file its rejoinder to the response by December 7.
Speaking to Herald, GF director Dr Claude Alvares said the notices have been issued seeking an explanation on renewal of leases and also the procedures laid down by the government while granting the renewals. “The matter has been kept for December 9, for final judgment,” he said.
The Court has also directed GF to submit copies of both the WPs and SLPs to the Directorate of Mines and Geology by Wednesday afternoon.
According to the petitions, last year the Supreme Court had ordered that all mining licences given for 50 years and that had expired in 2007 should not be automatically renewed. However, the government bypassed this order and allowed the miners to operate without auction or competitive bidding.
GF, through advocate Prashant Bhushan, told the court that Goa’s policy to renew leases did not conform to the law established by the Apex Court for optimally utilizing natural resources. Bhushan contended that the State should have auctioned the mining leases instead of renewing them.
The Senior Counsel argued that the MMDR ordinance approved on January12 did not conceive of a renewal process. Bhushan pointed out that second renewals were done before the ordinance came into force, with 31 being renewed on January 12.
State Advocate General Atmaram Nadkarni, however, said that all the renewals had been done after following due procedure. He argued that the renewal process had begun much before the policy change.
Nadkarni informed the court that 26 per cent of the State’s revenue came from mining and over 1,60,000 people were dependent on the sector. “The whole economy gets paralysed (if mining is not resumed),” he said.
Earlier this month, the Central Government had also pulled up the State over renewal of 88 mining leases and sought details. The Union Mines Ministry had questioned whether valid environmental clearances, forest clearances and wildlife clearances were in place while granting second renewals to these leases.
