<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (8) TMI 723 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262806</link>
    <description>Special Goa-specific mining lease provisions were held to govern deemed leases and renewal, with mining after 22.11.2007 treated as illegal. Mining waste could not be dumped outside the leased area, because lease rights are confined to the lease boundary and separate environmental clearances may be required for sensitive land. An interim one-kilometre safety zone around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries was maintained, but no blanket prohibition applied within ten kilometres on the basis of the later order. The State was required to act against unauthorised transfers or amalgamations under the Mineral Concession Rules and strictly enforce the Goa illegal mining rules. Future mining was to operate under environmental safeguards, an annual excavation cap, and a permanent fund for sustainable development.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2015 10:09:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=393968" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 723 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262806</link>
      <description>Special Goa-specific mining lease provisions were held to govern deemed leases and renewal, with mining after 22.11.2007 treated as illegal. Mining waste could not be dumped outside the leased area, because lease rights are confined to the lease boundary and separate environmental clearances may be required for sensitive land. An interim one-kilometre safety zone around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries was maintained, but no blanket prohibition applied within ten kilometres on the basis of the later order. The State was required to act against unauthorised transfers or amalgamations under the Mineral Concession Rules and strictly enforce the Goa illegal mining rules. Future mining was to operate under environmental safeguards, an annual excavation cap, and a permanent fund for sustainable development.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>