Displaying items by tag: Supreme Court
Supreme Court asks cement producers near Katas Raj Temples to consider payment plans for water
04 May 2018Pakistan: The Supreme Court has asked cement producers using water near the Katas Raj Temples in Punjab to submit recommendations for a policy on how they should pay for the resource. The court noted that the companies have used water worth ‘billions of rupees’ without any payment, according to the Pakistan Observer newspaper. Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar criticised a local government official, “for giving away everything for free.” The court has been investigating media reports that the pond at the Hindu heritage site was drying out due to water consumption by nearby cement plants.
National Company Law Tribunal asks Binani Cement creditors to consider offer from UltraTech Cement
03 May 2018India: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has asked the Committee of Creditors (COC) of Binani Cement to consider UltraTech Cement's revised offer. It has also set 24 June 2018 as the completion deadline of the insolvency resolution process, according to the Press Trust of India. The NCLT also asked the COC to reconsider the resolution plan of Rajputana Properties if the subsidiary of Dalmia Bharat Group was willing to raise its offer over UltraTech Cement’s.
A consortium led by Dalmia Bharat won an auction for Binani Cement with a bid of US$974m in early March 2018. UltraTech Cement then made a direct bid to Binani Cement a few weeks later. However, the Supreme Court blocked UltraTech Cement’s offer in mid-April 2018. UltraTech Cement has since made a raised offer to the resolution professional handling the insolvency process of Binani Cement.
India: The Supreme Court has blocked an out-of-court offer by UltraTech Cement for Binani Cement. Banks had offered conditional support to UltraTech’s bid, seeking indemnity from Binani Industries, the owner of Binani Cement, against any potential legal action, according to the Economic Times newspaper. A consortium led by Dalmia Bharat won an auction for Binani Cement with a bid of US$974m in early March 2018. However, UltraTech Cement then made a direct bid to Binani Cement a few weeks later.
Binani Industries had deposited US$115m with HDFC Bank to show its commitment to the deal with UltraTech, along with a bank guarantee for nearly US$1bn. However, Dalmia Bharat had sent letters to all the banks involved saying that any settlement initiated by them would be a breach of trust as they had entered into a contract with Dalmia.
Indian government considering ban on petcoke use
11 April 2018India: The Supreme Court has been informed that the government is considering a ban on the use of petcoke by various industries. Additional Solicitor General A N S Nadkarni, representing the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, told the court that a decision on the matter could be made within one month, according to the New Indian Express newspaper.
At present it is unclear whether the cement industry would be affected. However, if it was included in the ban, this potentially could be a problem for Shree Cement, which uses 100% petcoke in its fuels mix, according to India Infoline News Service. Additionally, UltraTech Cement, JK Cement, JK Lakshmi Cement and Mangalam Cement have petcoke usages in the range of 75 - 85% and would also be negatively affected.
Creditors ask Binani Cement to seek approval from Supreme Court on UltraTech Cement deal
05 April 2018India: The creditors of Binani Cement have asked it to seek approval from the Supreme Court on an offer made by UltraTech Cement to buy the company outside of the on-going insolvency process. The lenders decided not to vote on UltraTech Cement’s offer, according to the Times of India newspaper. Instead, they asked for Binani Cement’s parent company, Binani Industries, to pay US$115m to show its commitment to the latest deal.
A consortium led by Dalmia Bharat won an auction for Binani Cement with a bid of US$974m in early March 2018. However, UltraTech Cement then made a direct bid to Binani Cement a few weeks later. Branches of the National Company Law Tribunal have since suggested that the companies settle the dispute ‘amicably.’ However, Binani’s creditors fear that Dalmia Bharat is likely to start legal proceedings without full court approval supporting UltraTech Cement’s direct offer.
Supreme Court lifts ban on petcoke and furnace oil by cement industry in northern states of India
14 December 2017India: The Supreme Court has lifted a ban on petcoke and furnace oil to the cement and power industries in Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. The court also directed the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) to set regulations for the sale of petcoke and fix emission standards for thermal power plants, according to the Indo-Asian News Service agency. Representatives of the cement industry have welcomed the ruling. The Central Pollution Control Board and the MEF issued the ban following a directive from the Supreme Court in late October 2017 prohibiting industries in the three neighbouring states of Delhi from using the polluting fuels.
More Maggi noodles to burn in cement kilns
04 October 2016India: The Supreme Court has approved Nestlé India and Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to destroy 550t of recalled stocks of Maggi noodles, which had passed their shelf life, in the kilns of cement plants. Queries on the disposal of the noodles had been raised by FSSAI. Previously, Nestlé India recalled stocks of Maggi noodles and destroyed around 38,000t of the product in 2015. Ambuja Cement was reportedly paid at the time to use the noodles as an alternative fuel.
All the coal board’s men…
01 October 2014Energy costs for cement producers in India are set for volatility following the Supreme Court's decision this week to cancel the vast majority of allocated coal blocks. After ruling that the allocation process by the Indian government was illegal and arbitrary the court stopped 214 out of 218 coal blocks. The affected operators working on the blocks have six months until 31 March 2015 to wind down production. At this point the government intends to auction off the blocks.
The background to this decision lies in the so-called coal allocation scam or 'Coalgate.' Over 80% of coal in India is produced by the state owned company Coal India. Since 1993 though the Indian government has been allocating coal blocks or leases to mine coal for captive use by industries such as cement, steel and power generation.
However, the allocation process was accused of lacking transparency compared to an open bidding process. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India estimated the loss to the government was an incredible US$30bn. The allocation process received further scrutiny as Indian coal imports rose leading to accusations of inefficiency on the Coal India side and corruption on the coal block side. Meanwhile, major power cuts such as those in the summer of 2012 focused both domestic and industrial users' minds on the state of the country's coal industry.
Following the power cuts in 2012, an inter-ministerial panel recommended the de-allocation of two coal blocks held by five companies, including Gujarat Ambuja Cement, Grasim Industries and Lafarge India.
India's coal imports started to increase rapidly around 2009 with an annual growth rate of around 5% and a demand growth of 25% from 2009 – 2014. The majority of its imported coal comes from Indonesia, Australia and South Africa. In 2012 its coal imports were over 150Mt.
With Indian cement producers facing production overcapacity and falling profit margins in recent years, any disruption to input costs such as power is bad news. The growing import rates point to an increasing supply-demand mismatch. A more open process for the allocation of India's vast coal reserves should be good news for industrial users in the medium to long term. However, in the meantime they may face a jolt.
Lafarge JV allowed to mine in forest region
11 July 2011India/Bangladesh: Khaitan & Co has won Supreme Court (SC) approval for French cement company Lafarge to mine limestone in India's north-eastern region in a landmark ruling that will likely set the tone for future reforms in environmental governance. Khaitan & Co litigation partner Sanjeev Kapoor instructed senior advocates for the company, which had commenced mining activity in Meghalaya as a French-Spanish joint venture Lafarge Umiam Mining.
Lafarge successfully defended allegations of fraud and wilful concealment of the facts while contesting the case after 2010's prohibition from mining in the area. The company's project involved sending limestone across the Indo-Bangladesh border on a conveyor belt as raw material for its cement plant in Bangladesh.
"This is a landmark judgement in the context of the environment and mining, especially for projects involving use of forest land for non-forest purposes. The judgement dwells deep into many areas that were until today untouched by any judicial interpretation," said Khaitan & Co. in a statement.
The SC forest bench has upheld the decision of the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF), which had granted revised environmental clearance, site clearance and stage-1 forest clearance to Lafarge. The bench, comprising chief justice S H Kapadia and justices Aftab Alam and K S Radhakrishnan dismissed the petition of 21 tribal activists under Shella Action Committee opposing Lafarge's mining activity in the forest region. The court took into consideration the principles of economic sustainability and environmental viability while laying down significant guidelines such as appointment of a 'National Regulator' to appraise projects, enforce environmental conditions and to impose penalties on polluters.
The court held that, "The word 'development' is a relative term. One cannot assume that the tribals are not aware of principles of conservation of forest. In the present case we are satisfied that limestone mining has been going on for centuries in the area and that it is an activity that is intertwined with the culture and the unique land holding and tenure system of the Nongtrai Village. On the facts of this case, we are satisfied with due diligence exercise undertaken by MoEF in the matter of forest diversion."