SC imposes Rs 1 lakh on Center for ‘insensitive’ stance in coal mine lease

The court also refused to pay any claim to the Union Coal Ministry for any additional levy for the coal extracted by BLA Industries from the mine. “Any such demand raised by Respondent No. 1 – UOI is hereby dismissed and dismissed,” the court said.

The Supreme Court bench headed by CJI NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli also noted the sequence of events in the matter concerned. BLA Industries followed due process in securing the “Gotoria (East & West) Coal Block” at Mohapani Coalfield to meet the coal requirements of the Captive Power Plant.

“We are constrained to make certain comments with regard to the conduct of Respondent No. 1 – UoI. Here is a case where a private party complied with all the rules and regulations before investing a large sum of money for carrying on business, As applicable. In fact, from the facts of the case it appears that this Respondent No. 1 – UOI did not comply with the letter of the law,” it said according to news agency PTI.

The Supreme Court also noted that it was the private side that suffered the consequences of the Centre’s “reckless and harsh approach”. This approach resulted in the cancellation of the coal block in a 2014 decision on a PIL.

“In order to mitigate the distress of the petitioner, the Respondent No. 1 – UOI filed an affidavit before this Court including the petitioner in the list of guilty mine owners on the ground of his own unlawful conduct. did not exercise due diligence whether the mine was allotted to the petitioner through lawful process. As a result of this harsh, careless and casual approach of the respondent no. 1 – UoI, the present petitioner suffered loss and humiliation.”

The judgment said that the “wrong” of the Center to include the name of the private firm in the list of 46 allottees of the coal block with the apex court hearing a PIL resulted in cancellation/cancellation of the lease which was legitimately was given in his favor.

The Supreme Court in a 2014 judgment on a PIL filed by advocate ML Sharma declared that the entire allocation of coal blocks with effect from July 14, 1993, as per the recommendations of the Screening Committee constituted by the Centre, and the allocations made after 1993 through the government distribution route. Through arbitrariness the blame was faced and were illegal.

The judgment, written by Justice Kohli, said that the private firm got the mining lease through lawful procedures and yet it “has suffered loss and humiliation” and the allotment was also cancelled.

The top court was deciding whether the coal block was allotted to the firm through the screening committee route and/or the government dispensation route. It was to find out whether the government was entitled to claim compensatory payment.

“Therefore it is held that the allocation of coal block made by the petitioner was not in accordance with the procedure laid down in the MMDR Act and MC Rules. The coal block was not allotted to the petitioner either through the Screening Committee route or the Central Government dispensation route. The fact which was not pointed out by the Respondent No. 1 – UOI at the proper level, due to which the petitioner was painted with the same brush as the other allottees listed in the Annex.”

“Considering that the petitioner was not the beneficiary of the erroneous process, the consequences stated in the second judgment shall not apply to him and hence, it cannot be asked to pay the penalty by way of compensatory payment, as demanded by respondent No. 1 – UOI,” it said.

In November 1994, the private firm applied for authorization for coal mining on forest land to the District Collector of Narsinghpur district of Madhya Pradesh.

In 1997, the central government allowed the grant of mining lease to a private firm.

first article