{"id":396316,"date":"2026-09-16T11:00:21","date_gmt":"2026-09-16T05:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=396316"},"modified":"2026-09-18T15:21:53","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T09:51:53","slug":"sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/","title":{"rendered":"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In a long-running litigation concerning mining activities in Karnataka, while considering the applications concerning sale of minerals lying with erstwhile lessees after expiry of mining leases and amalgamation of mining blocks of different categories with virgin forest land for auction, the three-Judge Bench of Surya Kant, CJ., Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, JJ., approved Amicus’s 11 condition framework for disposal of minerals from expired leases, holding the conditions to be mandatory, while permitting amalgamation of Category A, B and C mining leases with virgin forest land subject to strict statutory and environmental safeguards. The Court clarified that amalgamation or execution of a composite lease does not, by itself, authorise mining in virgin forest areas without the requisite statutory approvals.<\/p>\n

Also Read: Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2026 restricts State levies on Mineral Rights and Mineral-Bearing Lands<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

The instant proceedings arose from the long-running litigation concerning mining activities in Karnataka. An earlier order dated 13 November 2019 had remanded to the Karnataka High Court the question whether particular leased land was revenue land or forest area. In the present order, the Court directed the High Court to take up the pending issue and endeavour to decide it, preferably within 3 months. The application concerned was accordingly disposed of.<\/p>\n

For the remaining pending applications, the Amicus Curiae placed before the Court a note dated 7 September 2026 after referring to Report No. 20 of 2026 of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC). The pending interlocutory applications were classified into 6 categories:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Category I<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Mineral Sale from Expired Leases<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Category II<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Issue related to fixation of MPAP<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Category III<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Issue of Amalgamation of Mining Blocks of Different Categories and Virgin Forest Land for Auction<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Category IV<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Issue related to B-1 category mines situated near the inter-State boundary of Karnataka & Andhra Pradesh<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Category V<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Issues related to refund of earnest money\/guarantee money<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Category VI<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Miscellaneous Matters<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The present order deals with Categories I and III only.<\/p>\n

Also Read: Offshore Areas Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining and Transportation) Rules, 2026 — Key Highlights<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

CATEGORY I: Mineral Sale from Expired Leases<\/p>\n

Category I deals with the fate of minerals excavated during the subsistence of mining leases but remaining with the erstwhile lessees after expiry of the leases. The Amicus drew the Court’s attention to Rules 12(1)(gg<\/span>) and 12(1)(hh<\/span>)<\/a>, Minerals (Other than Atomic and Hydrocarbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016<\/a> (MCR, 2016). Under Rule 12(1)(gg<\/span>), an erstwhile lessee is required to remove mineral excavated during the subsistence of the lease within a maximum period of 6 months from expiry of the lease. Rule 12(1)(hh<\/span>) further provides that minerals not removed within 1 month after being notified by the State Government are deemed to become the property of the State Government. Thus, ordinarily, once the stipulated periods had expired, the minerals would become Government property in terms of the statutory scheme.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that in its earlier order dated 23 September 2011 in Samaj Parivartana Samudaya<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, 2011 SCC OnLine SC 1603<\/a>, it was directed that the existing stocks of iron ore and manganese in the mining leases were to be sold through e-auction conducted by the Monitoring Committee constituted by the Court. However, this regime was subsequently discontinued by orders dated 20 May 2022 in Samaj Parivartana Samudaya<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, (2022) 18 SCC 88<\/a> and 21 July 2022 in Samaj Parivartana Samudaya<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2097<\/a>, which permitted respective lessees to sell the mineral directly, including by export. Consequently, the Amicus proposed a limited exception to the ordinary statutory consequence under Rules 12(1)(gg<\/span>) and 12(1)(hh<\/span>).<\/p>\n

The Amicus submitted that an erstwhile lessee could be permitted to dispose of the mineral, or claim a lien over its value where the mineral had already been sold pursuant to the Court’s directions, provided following 11 conditions were satisfied:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    The lessee must have approached the Supreme Court seeking permission to dispose of the mineral before expiry of the lease or, at the latest, immediately thereafter.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    The lease must fall within Category A or Category B, as classified under the Court’s judgment dated 18 April 2013 in Samaj Parivartana Samudaya<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, (2013) 8 SCC 154<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    For Category B leases, the Reclamation and Rehabilitation (R&R) Plan approved by the CEC in accordance with the Court’s guidelines must have been successfully implemented.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    Recommencement of mining operations must have been approved under the Court’s order dated 28 September 2012 in Samaj Parivartana Samudaya<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, (2013) 8 SCC 222<\/a> and order dated 18 April 2013.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  5. \n

    The Mining Plan and Annual Programme (MPAP) must have been approved by the CEC in accordance with the R&R guidelines approved by the Court.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  6. \n

    In Category B leases, the guaranteed money towards implementation of the R&R Plan and compensation, as required under the judgment dated 18 April 2013, must have been deposited with the Monitoring Committee.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  7. \n

    The mineral proposed to be sold must have been duly recorded in returns filed with the Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) on or before expiry of the lease.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  8. \n

    At the time of expiry of the lease, the lessee must possess valid Environmental Clearance and Forest Clearance, wherever applicable, for the forest land comprised in the lease.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  9. \n

    The aggregate quantity already sold together with the quantity proposed to be sold must not exceed 5 per cent of the mineral quantity declared in the IBM returns prior to September 2011, when the Court permitted sale of existing mineral stock. This condition applies to old stock available in September 2011.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  10. \n

    The proposed sale must not involve processing or extraction of mineral from overburden dumps, since such activity would amount to fresh mining operations.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  11. \n

    The proposed sale must not involve mineral lying in stockyards, which is regulated by the Court’s separate order dated 20 April 2012.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The Amicus submitted that the State of Karnataka’s application seeking clarification of the orders dated 20 May 2022 and 21 July 2022 should be allowed to the extent that those orders do not govern material or quantities of ore lying under expired mining leases. The State Government should consequently be entitled to act under Rules 12(1)(gg<\/span>) and 12(1)(hh<\/span>) after expiry of the prescribed period. It was submitted that those orders should not benefit leaseholders lacking valid Environmental Clearance and Forest Clearance.<\/p>\n

    Further, applications concerning the same lease and where the 11 conditions had been fulfilled, should be disposed of in accordance with the CEC’s recommendations by permitting release of the sale proceeds to the applicant. Other Category I applications in which the CEC had recommended rejection should be remitted to the CEC for fresh examination against the proposed eleven conditions.<\/p>\n

    Analysis and Decision<\/p>\n

    After considering the Amicus’s submissions, the CEC Report and the material on record, the Court accepted and approved all 11 conditions stipulated by the Amicus, as the governing framework for permitting the sale or disposal of minerals excavated during the subsistence of expired mining leases.<\/p>\n

    The Court explained that the conditions were carefully calibrated to reconcile 2 competing considerations, the statutory mandate contained in Rules 12(1)(gg<\/span>) and 12(1)(hh<\/span>), MCR, 2016 and the peculiar circumstance that lessees had been prevented from independently disposing of minerals while the Court-monitored e-auction regime remained in force. At the same time, the Court emphasised that the safeguards incorporated in the R&R and MPAP framework, together with the requirement of valid environmental and forest clearances, could not be diluted.<\/p>\n

    Further, the Court made the legal position unequivocally clear that “these conditions are mandatory in character” and must be strictly complied with before a lessee is permitted to dispose of mineral from an expired lease or a lessee is permitted to claim a lien over proceeds of mineral already sold. No relaxation of any of the 11 conditions was permissible except by an order of the Court itself.<\/p>\n

    The Court disposed of the application with the clarification that iron ore excavated during the subsistence of a lease but remaining with the erstwhile lessee after expiry of the lease would be governed strictly by the 11 conditions. Further, the orders dated 20 May 2022 and 21 July 2022 would not enure to the benefit of leaseholders who did not possess valid Environmental Clearance and Forest Clearance.<\/p>\n

    For the applications concerning the same lease, the State of Karnataka was granted 2 weeks to file its response, after which the applications would be listed for disposal. For the remaining Category I applications in which the CEC had recommended rejection, the Court accepted the Amicus’s submission and remitted them to the CEC for fresh examination with reference to the eleven approved conditions. The State was expressly permitted to make submissions regarding compliance with Conditions 1—11 and to contest the Amicus’s contention concerning inability to dispose of the minerals within the period stipulated by Rule 12(1)(gg<\/span>).<\/p>\n

    Also Read: SC pushes for Strong Monitoring Framework to Curb Illegal Sand Mining in Chambal Gharial Sanctuary; Issues Comprehensive Directions<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

    CATEGORY III: Amalgamation of Mining Blocks of Different Categories and Virgin Forest Land for Auction<\/p>\n

    The issue in Category III concerned with whether erstwhile mining leases falling within Categories A, B and C, together with virgin forest land, could be amalgamated into a single compact block for the purpose of auction.<\/p>\n

    The Amicus submitted that such amalgamation could be permitted, but only subject to stringent safeguards. The Amicus proposed several safeguards, including:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. \n

      No mining should be permitted in the virgin forest portion unless approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980<\/a> had been obtained. In the remaining portion, mining should be permitted only where the relevant statutory clearances were already in place.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    2. \n

      Mining operations, including the grant of any Temporary Working Permission, should remain strictly governed by the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957<\/a> (MMDR Act), the rules framed under that Act and the terms and conditions governing the auction of the block.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    3. \n

      The State Government could execute mining leases over the entire amalgamated block, provided the successful lessee undertook that mining would not commence in the virgin forest portion until the requisite statutory approvals and clearances were obtained.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    4. \n

      For the broken-up portions of the amalgamated block formerly covered by erstwhile leases, the statutory approvals and clearances of the previous lessees could be transferred to the successful lessee under Section 8-B<\/a>, MMDR Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    5. \n

      The applicable circulars and guidelines governing auctioned mining leases, together with the Court-approved R&R Plan guidelines, should continue to apply to the amalgamated blocks.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      However, the petitioner strongly opposed amalgamation and contended that combining mining leases of different categories with virgin forest land could have deleterious environmental consequences, as it could open ecologically sensitive virgin forest areas to large-scale mining in conjunction with adjoining leased areas. It was further contended that amalgamation could result in oligopolies within the mining industry, because only a limited number of large firms might have the financial capacity to acquire and operate such large amalgamated blocks. This could enable such firms to dominate the industry and corner a disproportionate share of the market.<\/p>\n

      Analysis and Decision<\/p>\n

      The Court did not accept the proposition that amalgamation was impermissible per se and characterised amalgamation of mining leases of different categories together with virgin forest land into one compact block as a matter of “operational rationalisation” which could be permitted provided the safeguards consistently applied by the Court in monitoring mining activity in Karnataka were not diluted.<\/p>\n

      However, the Court held that virgin forest land “stands on a distinct footing” and its inclusion in an amalgamated block could not itself be treated as permission or clearance for mining. Therefore, the requirement of prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980<\/a> remained fully intact notwithstanding the amalgamation.<\/p>\n

      Similarly, the execution of a composite lease over the entire amalgamated block does not confer a right to mine an area for which the requisite statutory clearances have not yet been obtained.<\/p>\n

      The Court approved the transfer of statutory approvals and clearances of previous lessees to auction purchasers under Section 8-B<\/a>, MMDR Act<\/a>, insofar as the broken-up portions of the amalgamated blocks were concerned. The Court found such transfer consistent with the statutory scheme because it avoided “needless duplication of the clearance process” without compromising compliance.<\/p>\n

      The Court further held that continued application of the R&R guidelines and the circulars and guidelines governing auctioned leases would preserve the rehabilitation and monitoring framework developed through the Court’s long-standing supervision.<\/p>\n

      Accordingly, the Court permitted amalgamation of erstwhile Category A, B and C mining leases together with virgin forest land into compact blocks for auction, subject to strict compliance with following 6 conditions:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. \n

        No mining shall take place in the virgin forest portion unless approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980<\/a> has been obtained. In the remaining area, mining is permissible only where the relevant statutory clearances are in place.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      2. \n

        Mining operations, including Temporary Working Permission, must strictly comply with the MMDR Act, rules framed thereunder, and the terms and conditions of the auction.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      3. \n

        The State Government may execute a lease over the entire amalgamated block, but the successful lessee must undertake that mining in virgin forest areas will not begin until the requisite statutory approvals and clearances are obtained.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      4. \n

        For broken-up portions of amalgamated blocks, statutory approvals and clearances of the previous lessees may be transferred to and vested in auction purchasers under Section 8-B<\/a>, MMDR Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      5. \n

        All applicable circulars and guidelines governing auctioned leases must be strictly followed.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      6. \n

        The guidelines for preparation of Reclamation and Rehabilitation Plans approved by the Court on 13 May 2012 and reiterated thereafter must be strictly followed.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Decision<\/p>\n

        The Court disposed of the applications in terms of above-discussed directions and conditions. It directed that the main matter be listed for further consideration on 29 September 2026.<\/p>\n

        Also Read: “Stop Filing Affidavits and Start Acting”: Supreme Court Issues Sweeping Directions to Three States as Illegal Sand Mining Continues to Destroy the Chambal Sanctuary<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

        [Samaj Parivartana Samudaya<\/span> v. State of Karnataka<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1899<\/a>, decided on 8-9-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

        Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

        For the Petitioners:<\/span> Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR Mr. Anurag Tiwary, Adv. Mr. Shashi Kiran Shetty, Advocate General Mr. Nishanth Patil, A.A.G. Mr. Sanchit Garga, AOR Mr. Shashwat Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Oorja Goel, Adv.<\/p>\n

        For the Respondents:<\/span> Mr. P. S. Sudheer, AOR Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aditya Narayan, Adv. Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rahul Pandey, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Purohit, Adv. Mr. Jatin Lalwani, Adv. Ms. Prerna Prakash, Adv. Mr. Rohit Amit Sthalekar, AOR Mr. Siddhant Singh, Adv. Mr. Kunal Verma, AOR Mr. Neeraj Shekhar, AOR Mr. Rajesh Maurya, Adv. Mr. Ujjwal Ashutosh, Adv. Mr. Ritwik Prasad, Adv. Mr. Amrendra Singh, Adv. Ms. Minakshi Singh, Adv. Mr. Anand Krishna, Adv. Mr. Prakash Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. K M Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. B K Satija, Adv. Mr. Pranay Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Rajeeva Ranjan Rajesh, Adv. Ms. A. Sumathi, AOR Mr. K.M. Natraj, A.S.G. Mrs. Shradha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Shubranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. T.s. Sabarish, Adv. Mr. S.n.terdal (aor), Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. R.r. Rajesh, Adv. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Adv. Mr. Dr. N Visakamurthy (aor), Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Adv. Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, Adv. Ms. Uditha Chakravarthy, Adv. Mr. Debdeep Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Abhay Singh Yadav, Adv. M\/s Lex Regis Law Offices, AOR Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjeev K. Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Avirat Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sania Abbasi, Adv. Ms. Umang Motiyani, Adv. Mr. Pulkit Goyal, Adv. M\/s Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Chandra Prakash, AOR Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mrs. Sudha Gupta, AOR Mr. Sumit Goel, Adv. Ms. Swati Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Samaiya, Adv. Mr. Akhil Shresth, Adv. M\/S. Parekh & Co., AOR Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari, AOR Mr. Munawwar Naseem, AOR Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, AOR Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, AOR Ms. Adviteeya, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR Mr. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Shubranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Suhashini Sen, Adv. Mr. S.k.singhania, Adv. Mr. T.s.sabarish, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Gopi Chand, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Bhargava V. Desai, AOR Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Sharma, AOR Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra-i, AOR Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Ms. Uditha Chakravarthy, Adv. Mr. Abhay Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. G. N. Reddy, AOR Mr. Gaichangpou Gangmei, AOR Mr. Arjun D. Singh, Adv. Mr. Maitreya Mahaley, Adv. Mr. Yimyanger Longkumer, Adv. Mr. Kamei Bestman Kabui, Adv. Mr. Sachu G, Adv. M\/S. A P & J Chambers, AOR Mr. Shashi Kiran Shetty, Advocate General Mr. Nishanth Patil, A.A.G. Mr. Sanchit Garga, AOR Mr. Shashwat Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Arijit Dey, Adv. Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Vijender Kumar, Adv. Ms. Oorja Goel, Adv. Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR Mr. Samir Ali Khan, AOR Mr. Kashif Khan, Adv. Ms. Komal Vats Singh, Adv. Mrs. Kirti Renu Mishra, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Vikas Mehta, AOR M\/S. Karanjawala & Co., AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Sandiv Kalia, Adv. Ms. Zoya Sengupta, Adv. Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Sahil, Adv. Mr. Onkar Nath Sharma, Adv. Mr. Akhil Anand, AOR Mr. Rajeev Maheshwaranand Roy, AOR Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR Mr. Snehasish Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Tamal Sanyal, Adv. Mr. Piyush Malik, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Malakar, Adv. Mr. Maneesh, Adv. Mr. Vishal Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kanwal, Adv. Ms. Manjula Gupta, AOR Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, AOR Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mrs. Vaijayanthi Girish, AOR Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Aditya Narayan, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Purohit, Adv. Mr. Jatin Lalwani, Adv. Ms. Prerna Prakash, Adv. Mr. Giri Raj Singh, Adv. Mr. Kumar Dushyant Singh, AOR Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, AOR Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv. Ms. Rakshita, Adv. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Shubranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Suhasini Sen, Adv. Mr. S.K. Singhania, Adv. Mr. T.S. Sabarish, Adv. Mr. Rohan Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ishaan George, AOR Dr. Rukma George, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar Siddharth, Adv. Mr. Aman Ahluwalia, Adv. Mr. Pradul Singhal, Adv. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Shubranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Suhashini Sen, Adv. Mr. S.k.singhania, Adv. Mr. T.s.sabarish, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Gopi Chand, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raktim Gogoi, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Kartikeya Singh, AOR Mr. Vaibhav Tomar, Adv. Ms. Akshita Nigam, Adv. Mr. Kanhaiya Singla, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Kaushalendra Dutt Pandey, Adv. Ms. Gayatri Gokulakrishnan, Adv. Mr. Atrabhuvan Singh Bhadureya, Adv. Mr. Pranaya Kumar Mohapatra, AOR Mr. Mahesh Thakur, AOR Mr. Narveer Yadav, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Sati, Adv. M\/S. Nuli & Nuli, AOR Mr. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Shubranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Suhashini Sen, Adv. Mr. S.k.singhania, Adv. Mr. T.s.sabarish, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kn Phanindra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Ms. Shreya Kasera, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. R. Venkataramani, Attorney General for India Mr. K. Raghavacharyulu, Adv. Mr. Kailash Pandey, Adv. Mr. Ranjeet Singh, AOR Mr. Krishna Yadav, Adv. Ms. Yamika Khanna, Adv. Ms. K. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ketan Joshi, Adv. Mr. S. S. Shroff, AOR Mr. R. Venkataramani, Attorney General for India Mr. K. Raghavacharyulu, Adv. Mr. Kailash Pandey, Adv. Mr. Ranjeet Singh, AOR Mr. Krishna Yadav, Adv. Ms. Yamika Khanna, Adv. Ms. K. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ketan Joshi, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR M\/S. Nuli & Nuli, AOR Mr. Gaichangpou Gangmei, AOR Mr. Arjun D. Singh, Adv. Mr. Maitreya Mahaley, Adv. Mr. Yimyanger Longkumer, Adv. Mr. Kamei Bestman Kabui, Adv. Mr. Sachu G, Adv. Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, AOR Mr. Pulkit Tare, AOR Ms. Aastha Mehta, Adv. Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR Ms. Prerana Mohapatra, Adv. Ms. Prina Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Atmaram N.S. Nadkarni, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yashraj Singh Deora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Krishna Rastogi, Adv. Mr. Priyesh Mohan Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Aryan Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Deepti Arya, Adv. Mr. Manisha Gupta, Adv. Ms. Himanshi Nagpal, Adv. Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, AOR Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjeev K. Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Avirat Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sania Abbasi, Adv. Ms. Umang Motiyani, Adv. Mr. Pulkit Goyal, Adv. M\/s Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Sudipto Sircar , AOR Mr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rituraj Biswas, AOR Mr. Mayan Prasad, Adv. Ms. Sujaya Bardhan, Adv. Mr. Aayush Garg, Adv. Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, AOR Mr. Dhruv Joshi, Adv. Mr. Arindam Sarin, Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, AOR M\/S. Aura & Co., AOR Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Sr. Adv. Mr. Jayant Mohan, AOR Mr. Bhawal Mohan, Adv. Ms. Adya Shree Dutta, Adv. Ms. Dorjee Ongmu Lachungpa, Adv. Mr. Priyanshu Teotia, Adv. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, ASG Mr. Subhranshu Padhi, Adv. Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv. Mr. Rajeeva Rajan Rajesh, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Pranay Ranjan, Adv. Ms. Osheen Jain, Adv.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        The Court approved Amicus’s 11 condition framework for disposal of minerals from expired leases, holding the conditions mandatory, and permitted amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land for auction, subject to strict statutory and environmental safeguards..<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":396317,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[95888,45901,31849,114818,114824,60880,108068,114820,114819,44298,114823,114817,95684,114821,114825,5363,114822],"class_list":["post-396316","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-chief-justice-surya-kant","tag-environment-law","tag-environmental-clearance","tag-expired-mining-leases","tag-forest-clearance","tag-justice-joymalya-bagchi","tag-justice-v-mohana","tag-mcr-2016","tag-mineral-sale","tag-mines-and-minerals","tag-mining-block-amalgamation","tag-mining-in-karnataka","tag-mining-leases","tag-mmdr-act-1957","tag-reclamation-and-rehabilitation-plan","tag-supreme-court","tag-virgin-forest-land"],"yoast_head":"\nSC on expired mining leases & amalgamation of mining blocks | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases. It further allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases. It further allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-16T05:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-09-18T09:51:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"headline\":\"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-16T05:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-18T09:51:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3598,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Chief Justice Surya Kant\",\"Environment law\",\"Environmental clearance\",\"Expired Mining Leases\",\"Forest Clearance\",\"Justice Joymalya Bagchi\",\"Justice V. Mohana\",\"MCR 2016\",\"Mineral Sale\",\"mines and minerals\",\"Mining Block Amalgamation\",\"Mining in Karnataka\",\"mining leases\",\"MMDR Act 1957\",\"Reclamation and Rehabilitation Plan\",\"Supreme Court\",\"Virgin Forest Land\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Supreme Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/\",\"name\":\"SC on expired mining leases & amalgamation of mining blocks | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-16T05:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-18T09:51:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases. It further allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"sale of minerals from expired mining leases\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/16\\\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_7\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SC on expired mining leases & amalgamation of mining blocks | SCC Times","description":"Supreme Court permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases. It further allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards","og_description":"Supreme Court permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases. It further allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-09-16T05:30:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-09-18T09:51:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/"},"author":{"name":"Ritu","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"headline":"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards","datePublished":"2026-09-16T05:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-18T09:51:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/"},"wordCount":3598,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp","keywords":["Chief Justice Surya Kant","Environment law","Environmental clearance","Expired Mining Leases","Forest Clearance","Justice Joymalya Bagchi","Justice V. Mohana","MCR 2016","Mineral Sale","mines and minerals","Mining Block Amalgamation","Mining in Karnataka","mining leases","MMDR Act 1957","Reclamation and Rehabilitation Plan","Supreme Court","Virgin Forest Land"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Supreme Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/","name":"SC on expired mining leases & amalgamation of mining blocks | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp","datePublished":"2026-09-16T05:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-18T09:51:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Supreme Court permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases. It further allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"sale of minerals from expired mining leases"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/09\/16\/sc-on-expired-mining-leases-amalgamation-of-mining-blocks\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SC permits conditional sale of minerals from expired mining leases; allows amalgamation of mining blocks with virgin forest land subject to strict safeguards"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/sale-of-minerals-from-expired-mining-leases.webp","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/396316","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=396316"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/396316\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/396317"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=396316"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=396316"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=396316"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}