Shantilal Khushaldas And Bros. Pvt. Ltd., And ANR v. State Of Goa Thr Its Chief Secretary And ANR

2026:BHC-GOA:1032-DB Suzana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO.396 OF 2026

1. Shantilal Khushaldas & Bros. Pvt.

Ltd., A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, (2013), having its registered office at Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa- 403001 through its Authorised Representative Mr. Shivappa Dyamappa Chawan with office at the above address.

2. Shivappa Dyamappa Chawan, Authorised Representative of the Petitioner No.1, Indian National, 56 years of age, with Office at Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa.

.....Petitioners.

Versus

1. State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary, having office at Secretariate, Porvorim, Goa.

2. The Director, Directorate of Mines and Geology, having office at Menezes Braganza Building, Panaji, Goa.

Respondents.

Mr. Subodh S. Kantak, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vibhav Amonkar, Ms. Neha Kholkar, Ms. Maria Carmita D'Costa Mashelkar, Ms. Sonam Dessai and Mr. Raj Chodankar, Advocates for the Petitioners.

Mr. Devidas J. Pangam, Advocate General with Ms. Maria Simone J. Correia, Additional Government Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2. P.C.

1.

Registry to waive office objections and register the matter. 2.

Heard.

3.

We have passed Judgment dismissing WP/64/2017 filed by the Petitioner, in which the Petitioner had sought the following directions to Respondents No.1 and 2:

(i) Respondent No.1 and 2 to withdraw Order dated 05.11.2013 and Order dated 08.11.2013 to the extent it pertains to TC No.44/1951;

(ii) Respondent 1 and 2 to grant a first renewal order in favour of the Petitioners in respect of Mining Lease, as was directed by this Court.

(iii)Direct Respondent 1 and 2 not to take any coercive action against the Petitioners on the impugned Orders, during pendency of the Petition.

4.

Since we have held in our Judgment passed earlier today that the Petitioner is not entitled to any renewal of lease in respect of mine bearing TC No.44/1951, named 'Joleracho Dongor' situated at Maina/Cavorem, Quepem - Goa, and we have further held that even in the circumstances that the Petitioner had obtained an Order on its representation dated 07.12.2005 granting the same, the mining operations in mine TC No.44/1951 would also be covered by the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Goa Foundation v/s Union of India and others1 (GF-1). Since we have held that the Petitioner would not be entitled to first renewal of the mining lease and certainly not entitled to a second renewal that to extend the lease to 22.11.2007.

Having held so, the Petitioner would not be entitled to any reliefs in this Petition, more so since, in line with the directions of the Supreme Court in GF-I, the only manner in which a mining lease for the mineral block No. XVIII at Cavorem, Maina, corresponding to mining lease TC No.44/1951 could be done by inviting fresh tenders and holding auction for the said mining block.

to the Petitioner. The Petition is therefore rejected in view of our Judgment dated 08.05.2026 in Writ Petition No.64 of 2017. AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J. VALMIKI MENEZES, J. Signed by: MARIA SUZANA REBELLO Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 08/05/2026 16:08:27