SC: Advocate Must Protect Client Confidentiality Even after Client Turns Adversary  ||  SC: Revenue Record Mutation Alone Cannot Defeat a Person’s Property Title  ||  SC: SARFAESI Auction Valid Despite EMD Shortfall Where 25% Price Was Paid on Auction Day  ||  SC: Extended GST Limitation under S.74 Requires Notice to Specify Fraud or Concealment  ||  Allahabad HC Invalidates Key Provisions of Uttar Pradesh Tenancy Law  ||  Delhi HC: Writ Courts Cannot Prescribe Method for Determining Property Tax  ||  Bombay HC: ICC’s ‘No Sexual Element’ Finding Can Be Challenged under POSH Act  ||  Rajasthan HC: Road Widening Demolition Requires Title Claims and Fair Hearing  ||  Allahabad HC: Mere Presence or FIR Nomination is Insufficient for Conviction under Section 149 IPC  ||  MP HC: Employment Secured Through Forged Records Gives No Right to Hold Public Office    

Common Cause v. Union of India and others - (Supreme Court) (04 Apr 2016)

Mining leases do not lapse automatically for lack of activity, non-renewal

Mines and Minerals

Mining activities having not been conducted for consecutive years and the absence of an order by the State Government accepting renewal of the mining will not lead to an automatic lapse of the mining lease. Before the court was a follow-up application to its earlier decision that had restrained over 100 mining leaseholders from carrying on mining activity till all clearances and permissions were obtained from the government. As leaseholders approached the court to indicate compliance with the order, they faced a government claiming their leases to have lapsed automatically, either for non-activity or for lack of renewal. The court rejected the government’s arguments for automatic lapse of leases. It provided instead a clear formula for determining if a mining leaseholder had retained its rights, or if its rights were actually abrogated.

Tags : MINING LEASE   AUTOMATIC LAPSE   RENEWAL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved