Supreme Court Unveiled Victim Protection Plan For Trafficking Survivors and Urged Legal Reforms || Supreme Court Cautioned Against the Misuse of False POCSO Cases in Matrimonial Disputes || Supreme Court Cautioned Against the Misuse of False POCSO Cases in Matrimonial Disputes || SC: Assigning Mathadhipati’s Secular Duties to Govt Officer Violates Art 26, Undermines Mahantship || Supreme Court: All MIDC Units are Exempt From Property Tax Until Services are Transferred to NMMC || Supreme Court: All MIDC Units are Exempt From Property Tax Until Services are Transferred to NMMC || SC: Arbitral Award Unenforceable if Invoked During Pending Civil Suit Without Court’s Permission || Delhi High Court: Participation in Protests Can't Be a Ground to Deny Bail in PMLA Case || Delhi High Court Lays Down Guidelines to Mask Personal Details in Orders under Right to be Forgotten || Raj HC: Poverty Cannot Defeat Right to Bail and Accused Cannot be Jailed For Lack of Sureties

Tata Steel Limited and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. - (High Court of Jharkhand) (17 Sep 2015)

High Court upholds payments demanded by Government for mining leases

MANU/JH/1113/2015

Commercial

Holding that renewal of mining leases was subject to fulfillment of conditions of approval, the Court rejected Petitioners’ petitions against monies demanded by the government. It reiterated that the revenue earned was part and parcel of the development of the State and any restraint on it would profoundly affect the interest of the public at large. The Petitioners had accepted renewal of their leases aware of the payments required, and had failed to establish a case that the same were egregious. The Court directed Tata Steel to furnish payments in three instalments, with the last due in December, 2015.

Tags : MINING LEASE CONDITIONS INSTALMENT

Share :