The Chhattisgarh High Court has rejected an intra-court appeal filed by Keshkal G N India Bauxite Mines and Minerals Ltd regarding a bauxite mining lease in the Kanker–Bastar region of the state.
_0_0.jpg)
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, in an order passed on December 16, upheld an earlier single-judge ruling that had dismissed the company’s petition. The bench has observed that the firm had not violated any legally enforceable right and consequently lacked the standing to pursue the appeal.
Explore- Most accurate data to drive business decisions with 50+ reports across the value chain
Started in 2003, the dispute roots back to the time when Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation (CMDC) signed a joint venture with the appellant company for the exploration of bauxite and the establishment of a calcination plant. The agreement says that CMDC owned a 25 per cent stake in the venture, while the private partner managed daily operations and retained a 74 per cent equity share.
Read More: Bauxite drives on the capesize demand, keeps the export ship afloat
In 2006, CMDC applied for a mining lease in Budhiyamari, Kanker district, citing state notifications that had earmarked the area for government undertakings. However, the proposal was rejected by the Union Ministry of Mines in August 2011 because it did not comply with the applicable guidelines.
The private company later approached the court, asserting that it qualified as an “aggrieved person” as it had invested more than INR 20 crore (USD 2.4 million) in setting up the calcination plant, allegedly relying on assurances provided by the state authorities.
Both the state and central governments opposed the plea, maintaining that any mining lease, if granted, would have been issued exclusively in favour of CMDC. The High Court has upheld this interpretation, concluding that the lease was intended exclusively for the state-owned corporation. Moreover, with no opposition from CMDC, the private partner did not come under consideration for seeking relief stemming from unmet commercial expectations.
The court has also concluded that the appellant was not hurt by any denial of any statutory or legal right and that its claim was rooted in lost business expectations. It is also noted that the changes to the mining law had rendered the lease application invalid.
With these observations, the court dismissed the appeal, bringing the long-running matter to a close.
Must read: Key industry individuals share their thoughts on the trending topics
Responses
