Bom HC: Civil Court Can Invoke Sec 151 CPC to Dismiss a Suit as Infructuous if Cause of Action Ends || Kerala HC: Arrest Grounds Need Not Be Shared With Foreigner’s Family If FRRO Or Embassy is Informed || Delhi HC Granted Interim Relief to JioStar in a Dispute over Legends League Cricket Broadcast Rights || SC: Dishonour of a Post-Dated Cheque Alone Does Not Establish Dishonest Intent For Cheating || SC: Disciplinary Proceedings Started During Service May Continue After Retirement If Rules Allow || Supreme Court: Earning Interest on a Bank Deposit Does Not Make it a Commercial Purpose || CCI Dismisses Complaint Against Rapido over Use of Private Vehicles in Bike Taxi Service || Allahabad HC: State Must Protect Individuals Threatened for Conducting Prayers in Private Spaces || Madras HC: Habeas Corpus Petition Cannot Be Used if Wife Voluntarily Elopes with Another Man || Calcutta High Court: Post-VRS Service Benefits Cannot be Denied; Ex-Employees Entitled to Arrears

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 :