Supreme Court Upholds Conviction as Husband Failed to Explain Wife’s Death in Matrimonial Home || Supreme Court: Crime Scene Re-Enactment Does Not Always Violate Right Against Self-Incrimination || Supreme Court: Cognizance Taken Without Hearing Accused under BNSS Section 223 is Void Ab Initio || Supreme Court Upholds Will in Sister’s Favour, Says Excluding Natural Heirs is Not Suspicious || Delhi HC: Absence of Public Witnesses and Videography in NDPS Recovery Relevant for Bail Decisions || Raj HC Initiates Suo Motu Cognizance Over Severe Water Crisis in Jodhpur, Issues Interim Directions || Del HC: Courts Cannot Direct, Monitor Inquiry Into Police Delay in Investigation After Bail Decision || Supreme Court: After the BNSS, a Pre-Cognizance Hearing is Mandatory in PMLA Cases || SC: Landowners Cannot be Forced to Waive Statutory Compensation to Claim Other Benefits || Supreme Court: Banks are Lenient With Big Borrowers But Strict With Ordinary Loan Applicants

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 :