PANAJI: The Bombay High Court in Goa on Wednesday attracted the state government because of its reluctance to submit a written statement about compliance with the Supreme Court’s assessment of those involved in illegal mining.
HC asked public advocates to get the officers responsible for proposing a written statement about what the state government had done for the past seven years in this case.
Goa Foundation approached the High Court who was seeking an investigation by an independent committee led by the former High Court Judge in the case of illegal transfer of mining rental in Goa violating Regulation 37 of the Rules of Mineral Concession, 1960.
“The Supreme Court, in the assessment of April 21, 2014, expressly stated That the rule 37 cannot be left violated by Lessees with impunity, and the state government cannot ignore the transfer by saying that mining rental transfers are in part of the mining practice in the country, “the Petitioner said.
The bench consisting of Judge Sadhana Jadhav and Manish Pitale told Advocate General Devidas Pangam, “…
It is impossible like this …
Give a list of six people and (say) this court cannot be done …
this cannot be done.
There are rules Law in this country.
You must show what is done in the past seven years “.
Pangam stated that the government had begun the process of several tenants that were leased, but stated that submitting a reward can have private respondents said that the government had brought this problem.
When the bench asked for a general advocate about the delay, he stated that the state to submit a review of petitions in SC asked the union government to amendments to mines and minerals (development and regulation) to act to deal with situations that have emerged in Goa, and add that the state government has initiated The process for recovery of money, and there is an order to recover several crores.
The court asked if it dragged his feet or did not take action against all these people.
Pangam told the bench that the Goa Foundation could not insist on the retirees of the High Court Judge to conduct an independent investigation into illegal mining, but the bench said that the Goa Foundation showed not acting in parts of the country.
Bench asked if this would be amounted to humiliation at the command of the Supreme Court.
Norma Alvares, representing the Goa Foundation, told the court that the state government had delayed and had been involved in all problems violations of the 37 MCR regulation, and had dragged his legs and even though the Shah Commission identified 53 parties and the center.
Empowerment Committee (CEC) states that there are a large number of parties, the state government only found six parties who violated after seven years.
Alvares said that an independent investigation by retired high court judges was needed because he did not believe the government would truly investigate violations, and had been looking elsewhere.
The bench also attacked at a party, asking whether the Supreme Court was needed to run Goa’s affairs sitting in Delhi.