Search Results for "mineral extraction"

133 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 133 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench Disposes of Criminal Petitions Seeking Quashing of Proceedings Under Mines and Minerals Act. The Petitions Challenged Registration of Cases Under IPC and MMRD Act, 1957, Claiming Lack of Authorized Complaint Under Section 22.

The High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench, presided by Justice H.P. Sandesh, heard a batch of twelve criminal petitions filed under Section 482 of the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Hears Writ Petitions Against Sand Ghat Auctions — Petitioners Challenge Validity on Grounds of Non-Compliance with Earlier Court Order and New State Policy. The Court Examines Whether Auctions Violate Environmental Norms and Whether Petitioners Have Standing.

Background: Three writ petitions came before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court challenging auction notices for sand ghats in Nagpur, Bhandara,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Customs Classification Dispute. n-Hexane Held to be a Separate Chemical Compound, Not Petroleum Oil, Under Customs Tariff Heading 2901.10 and Central Excise Tariff Heading 2901.90.

The case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, against the decision of CESTAT, Ahmedabad, which had dismissed the Revenue's appea...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Reviews Tahsildar's Jurisdiction Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code in Mineral Extraction Penalty Case. Writ petitions challenged penalty orders for illegal mineral extraction and raised interplay of Sections 48(7) and 330A regarding authorization and delegation of powers.

The judgment, delivered by the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), addressed three writ petitions filed by Montecarlo Ltd. Iron Triangle (Joint Vent...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Quashes Compounding Fee Demand Under Section 96(4) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 for Want of Prior Conversion of Patta Land. Quarrying Activity Commenced When Law Did Not Require Conversion as per Shakeel Pasha v. N. Sivasailam, Hence No Violation of Section 95.

The petitioner, a mineral company holding three quarrying licences granted in 2000 and 2002 for extraction of pink granite on patta agricultural lands...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Considers Challenge to Forest Notification as Ultra Vires the Constitution and Forest Laws — Mining Companies Allege Notification Violates Article 246 and Entry 54 of Union List, Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

The matter involved multiple writ petitions filed before the High Court of Karnataka by several mining corporations and mineral industries, including ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Examines Validity of Notification Imposing Forest Development Tax under Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 — Multiple Mining Companies Challenge the Levy as Ultra Vires the Constitution and Forest Laws.

The matter involved a batch of writ petitions filed before the High Court of Karnataka by various mining companies, individuals, and an industry assoc...