Initiatives such as carbon capture, sustainable sourcing and technological substitutes aim to achieve net-zero emissions, reducing environmental impact by curbing greenhouse gases and resource consumption. ICR delves into the endeavours undertaken by cement companies to mitigate emissions and the role of technology plays in the scheme of things.
The cement industry exerts a substantial environmental impact primarily through its emissions. Its production processes are energy-intensive and result in the release of significant amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2), contributing to global warming and climate change. This industry also generates air pollutants, including sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter, which adversely affect air quality and human health. Regulations and emission standards aim to limit the cement industry’s emissions and promote sustainability, but the environmental concerns remain significant and require ongoing attention. The environment has been a concern on the rise for a very long time. According to the World Air Quality Report 2023, India ranks eighth in the most polluted countries in the world amongst 131 countries with a population weighted average PM2. 5 level of 53.3 µg/m3 in 2022. The WHO guideline for annual PM2.5 levels is 5 µg/m3. Particulate matter, in the form of fine particles, harms respiratory health and settles on ecosystems, impacting soil and water bodies. Moreover, cement production entails the extraction of raw materials through quarrying and mining, which disrupts ecosystems, leads to habitat destruction, and causes soil erosion and water pollution. Water consumption for cooling and raw material preparation further strains local resources. To mitigate these environmental issues, the cement industry is adopting alternative fuels, improving energy efficiency, exploring carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) and storage (CCS) technologies and focusing on sustainable sourcing and recycling. Vehicular emissions, industrial waste, smoke from cooking, construction activities, crop burning and power generation are among the biggest sources of air pollution in India. The country’s dependence on coal, oil and gas due to rampant electrification makes it the world’s third-largest polluter, contributing over 2.65 billion metric tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere every year. Mitigating environmental emissions is top priority for cement manufacturers and innovative methods are the primary goal of their R&D departments. Ajay Sharma, Deputy Manager – Environment, Udaipur Cement Works Limited (UCWL), states, “Technology plays a crucial role in curbing emissions and improving the environment, allowing optimisation and cost saving. The installed pollution control equipment is connected with real time monitoring systems, which, in case of process failure of the interlocked facility, automatically tip/stop the plant operation to control environmental emissions.”
AN ENERGY INTENSIVE PROCESS Energy consumption in cement plants is a critical aspect of the industry’s operations, and it is closely linked to emissions, primarily CO2 emissions. Cement manufacturing requires a significant amount of energy for various processes, including crushing, grinding, heating and clinker production. This energy typically comes from fossil fuels, such as coal, natural gas, and to a lesser extent, oil. To achieve their sustainability goals and to safeguard the environment, the industry uses alternative fuels like biomass, waste materials, and non-recyclable plastics in the plants to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels. Raman Bhatia, Founder and Managing Director, Servotech Power Systems says, “Cement manufacturing indeed requires a significant amount of energy, which comes from carbon-emitting sources. However, by integrating Servotech’s on-grid solar system, the cement manufacturing process can be supported with clean and renewable energy. This sustainable energy source not only reduces the carbon footprint but also lowers operational costs, making the entire process more environmentally friendly and economically viable.” A high intensity of heat generation is required for the process of clinkerisation, which is key to the process of cement making. This high energy intensity is a major driver of carbon emissions associated with cement manufacturing. The primary environmental concern related to energy consumption in cement plants is the release of CO2 emissions. When fossil fuels are burned to provide the necessary heat for clinker production, carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. This CO2 accounts for a significant portion of the industry’s total greenhouse gas emissions. Automation plays a major role in managing the energy demands of the cement sector. Manish Chordia, Regional Sales Manager-Cement (South Asia and Africa), ABB India, elaborates, “Efforts to reduce energy demands, by using higher efficiency equipment and substituting fuels and raw materials, are important to lower production costs. These changes introduce constraints that must be managed to secure the required quality and productivity of the plant.” “There can be no flaws or failures in cement composition or entire structures could disintegrate. Advanced measuring, information and optimisation systems are needed as never before to monitor and correct any deviations in quality standards – from quarry to dispatch. Automation systems minimise material and energy use in complex processes,” he adds.
SUBSTITUTION FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION Efforts are underway in the cement industry to mitigate these environmental harms. These include the use of alternative fuels and raw materials, energy efficiency improvements, carbon capture and utilisation/storage technologies, and sustainable sourcing of raw materials. The industry is also adhering to stricter environmental regulations and emissions standards are being put in place to limit the industry’s impact on the environment and promote more sustainable practices. As India is part of the Paris Agreement and has aligned itself with its goal of achieving net zero by 2070 as announced in the Glasgow Climate Summit, it is in the race to achieve carbon neutrality by the said deadline. Thus, the industry has turned its focus on the use of alternative fuels and raw materials for the cement manufacturing process. This use of alternatives in the manufacturing process not only has significant ecological benefits of conserving non-renewable resources, the reduction of waste disposal requirements and reduction of emissions, but is also of an economic benefit for the industry. The cement industry is actively exploring and adopting various substitutes and technologies to achieve net-zero emissions and reduce its environmental impact. One significant approach is the use of alternative fuels, such as biomass (e.g., wood chips, rice husks), waste-derived fuels (e.g., municipal solid waste, tire-derived fuels), and non-recyclable plastics. Substituting traditional fossil fuels with these alternatives reduces greenhouse gas emissions and resource consumption. As large consumers of energy, transitioning to renewable energy sources, like wind, solar, and hydropower, to meet some of the energy needs of cement plants can significantly reduce carbon emissions. Implementing energy-efficient technologies and practices can reduce energy consumption and emissions. This includes optimising kiln design, heat recovery systems and upgrading equipment. “Our highly efficient On-Grid Solar System is designed to provide solar energy to cement manufacturing plants seamlessly. The process begins with the installation of solar panels, which capture sunlight and convert it into electricity. The energy generated is then fed into the plant’s electrical grid. This solar-generated electricity effectively powers various operations within the cement manufacturing process, reducing the plant’s reliance on conventional energy sources and lowering its electricity costs. This transition to solar energy not only makes cement production more sustainable but also contributes to reduced operational expenses, ultimately benefiting the environment and making the entire process cost-efficient,” Bhatia adds.
CIRCULAR ECONOMY The cement industry can make significant contributions to the circular economy, thereby reducing its environmental impact and emissions. Embracing circular economy practices can lead to more sustainable cement production by minimising waste, conserving resources, and reducing the carbon footprint. The cement industry can incorporate various industrial byproducts into its production processes. For example, steel slag, coal, fly ash and silica fumes can be used as supplementary cementitious materials, reducing the environmental impact of these waste materials. Wastes from various industries like bio-waste, non-usable rubber, plastic etc. can be used as fuel. This would prevent the said waste from accumulating in the land and ocean beds, thus harming land fertility and creating water body pollution. Besides the use of waste as fuels and raw materials, waste heat from cement production processes can be captured and repurposed to provide additional energy for the plant or for other industrial processes, reducing the industry’s energy consumption and emissions. The captured CO2 emissions from cement plants can be utilised in other processes or industries, such as the production of synthetic fuels, chemicals, or building materials. This not only reduces emissions but also creates value from a waste product. Old concrete structures can be recycled and crushed to produce recycled aggregates, which can be used in new concrete production. This conserves natural resources and reduces the need for quarrying and mining. According to a report published by McKinsey, ‘The Circular Cement Value Chain: Sustainable and Profitable, October 2023, the cement value chain is well positioned to create closed loops, or automatically regulated systems, for carbon dioxide, materials and minerals and energy. This entails circular economies, which are based on the principles of eliminating waste and pollution, circulating products and materials and regenerating nature. Circularity can work jointly with reducing carbon emissions in cement production because circular technologies follow the paradigm of three crucial decarbonisation strategies: redesign, reduce and repurpose. Addressing the total volume of materials needed — or redesigning materials, buildings, and infrastructure — can play a critical role in changing how industry leaders approach projects. Next, shifting from fossil to alternative fuels can help reduce emissions of materials. Finally, repurposing, repairing, and refurbishing existing assets and infrastructure can help limit the need for new products by utilising captured carbon dioxide emissions and reinserting them into the value chain. According to estimates, and expected carbon prices, each of these circularity technologies will be value-positive by 2050, with some already more profitable than today’s business-as-usual solutions. That said, a few solutions were not factored into our analysis despite being critical to reaching net-zero emissions, including the reduction of clinker in cement through substitutes and low binder intensity, the reduction of cement in concrete through less overspecification by design, and the overall reduction of concrete in the built environment through alternative building materials. Thus, these solutions should be considered part of a broader definition of circularity. By adopting these circular economy practices, the cement industry can reduce waste generation, conserve resources, lower energy consumption, and minimise carbon emissions. This not only benefits the environment but also enhances the long-term sustainability and resilience of the industry itself, helping it align with global efforts to address climate change and environmental challenges.
FUTURE OF ENVIRONMENT AND EMISSION “The future of emissions in the cement industry is likely to be marked by efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The pace of change will depend on a variety of factors, including technological advancements, regulatory policies, and the level of commitment from industry stakeholders. The industry is expected to continue its journey towards lower emissions, driven by a growing awareness of the environmental impact and the importance of sustainable practices. The cement industry shall continue to invest in and adopt carbon reduction technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and CCUS to capture and sequester CO2 emissions from cement production. These technologies may become more widespread as the industry seeks to reduce its carbon footprint,” says Sharma. “Use of alternative materials and blends like slag, fly ash, calcined clay and limestone, is expected to be increased. These materials can help reduce the clinker content in cement, lowering emissions during production. The industry is also paving a path towards transitioning to renewable energy sources for power generation at cement plants, such as solar, wind and hydropower, which will reduce carbon emissions associated with energy use in cement production,” he adds. Environmental protection is at the core of the cement industry. With the race to net zero, decarbonisation and sustainability are at the forefront of the cement industry. Experts from all fields of the industry are involved in research and development to reduce their emissions. Various technological advancements and latest machinery and equipment tech are getting incorporated by players of the industry as an effort to safeguard the environment. The future of the cement industry in India holds the potential for significant improvements in environmental sustainability and emissions reduction. However, realising this potential will require a concerted effort by the industry, government, and other stakeholders to adopt and implement sustainable and low-carbon technologies and practices.
Two cement concrete pavement roads covering a total stretch of 2.2 km in Akhoya village were inaugurated on 27th June 2026 by MLA Nuklutoshi Longkumer, who attended as the special guest. The project comprises the one km L Pangersowa Road and the one point two km Longchara Junction to RC Chiten Jamir Memorial Government High School road. A formal programme followed the inauguration at the school auditorium.
A technical report was presented by Er Waloniba of the Urban Engineering Wing-III, Kohima, which stated the project was sanctioned in March 2026 under the Special Assistance to States for Capital Investment scheme for 2025-26 at a sanctioned cost of Rs 29.1 million (mn). The work order was issued to M/s Ensign Construction on thirtieth April 2026 with a stipulated completion period of 12 months. Work commenced on fourth May 2026 and was completed on sixth June 2026, with the contractor and team finishing the tasks in around two months. The project included a single-lane cement concrete pavement with side drains, two slab culverts and breast walls at required locations.
Longkumer acknowledged the Chief Minister, the advisor for urban development, contractors and other stakeholders for the allocation and support, and he commended the contractor for early completion. He noted that cooperation from landowners and the community had been important in resolving land related issues that can otherwise delay developmental works. He emphasised that planned developmental activities carried out with collective effort would enable more projects to be implemented successfully.
The headmaster of RC Chiten Jamir Memorial Government High School, I Chubasenba Longkumer, outlined the school background, noting it was established in 1962, was earlier known as Government High School Changtongya and was renamed in 2014. Local representatives said the improved approach roads would ease access for students, staff, patients and the general public and fulfil a long standing aspiration of residents. A dedicatory prayer was offered by the pastor and the programme concluded with a ribbon cutting attended by village council and town council representatives.
Indian Cement Review (ICR) and Fuller Technologies brought industry, policy and technology leaders together to discuss how cement innovation can drive green construction at scale, writes Rakesh Rao.
India is building at a pace few countries can match. Highways, airports, housing, logistics parks, industrial corridors and urban infrastructure are reshaping the country’s economic geography. But beneath this growth story lies a difficult question: can India continue to build at scale without locking itself into a high-carbon future?
That question formed the core of an online panel discussion titled “Driving Green Construction Through Cement Innovation”, organised by Indian Cement Review (ICR) in association with Fuller Technologies as the Presenting Partner on June 25, 2026. The webinar brought together experts from cement technology, R&D, global industry platforms, building performance policy and international development cooperation to examine how low-carbon cement and material innovation can accelerate India’s green construction transition.
The discussion came at a crucial time. India has committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070 and reducing the carbon intensity of its economy by 45 per cent by 2030. At the same time, the country’s construction sector is expanding rapidly, driven by urbanisation, infrastructure development, housing demand and industrial growth. Cement, as one of the most widely used construction materials, sits at the heart of this transition. It is indispensable to development, but also central to the challenge of reducing embodied carbon in buildings and infrastructure.
Moderated by Nitika Krishan, Senior Urban Infrastructure and Sustainable Policy Consultant, the panel featured:
Dr Hemantkumar Aiyer, VP and Head R&D, Nuvoco Vistas Corp Ltd;
Devika Wattal, Innovation Lead, Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA);
Dr Sunita Purushottam, MD, GBPN India (Global Buildings Performance Network); and
Vaibhav Rathi, Senior Technical Advisor, GIZ (the German Agency for International Cooperation)
Setting the tone for the discussion, Nitika Krishan underlined the scale of the challenge before the sector. “The question before us is no longer whether we build, but how we build sustainably,” she said. She pointed out that construction accounts for nearly 40 per cent of global energy-related carbon emissions when both operational and embodied carbon are considered. Cement production, she added, remains one of the hardest industrial processes to decarbonise.
For India, this is not merely an environmental issue. It is a development issue, a competitiveness issue and increasingly, a market issue. As one of the world’s largest cement producers and among the fastest-growing construction markets, India’s material choices will influence the carbon trajectory of its built environment for decades. As Krishan observed, sustainability solutions in economies such as India must not remain limited to laboratory success. They must be scalable, commercially viable and practical at national level.
The innovation gap: From technology to market
Experts believe that there is a need to bridge the innovation gaps for making decarbonisation in cement and concrete scalable. Devika Wattal of GCCA, explained, “The starting point must be the core cement manufacturing process itself. The first and foremost is the heart of our process, the heart of cement manufacturing. How do we reduce clinker? That is always a topic where industry is working very intrinsically.”
Clinker reduction remains one of the most important pathways for lowering emissions in cement. Since clinker production is energy-intensive and chemically emits carbon dioxide, reducing the clinker factor through supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), blended cements and new chemistries can have a significant impact. Wattal also noted that carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) will have a role, though it may not be the first lever for all markets.
However, she stressed that innovation cannot stop at technology development. A solution that works in the lab must also be adaptable to industry, scalable in production and acceptable in construction practice. “It is important for that innovation to be adaptable, to be scalable, and so that it can be executed in real time,” she said.
Wattal also called for stronger enabling systems around innovation. These include performance-based standards, product-level embodied carbon databases and clearer frameworks for evaluating green materials. Without these, low-carbon cement products may struggle to compete with conventional materials in procurement and design.
R&D must balance carbon, cost and performance
Bringing in the R&D perspective into the discussion, Dr Hemantkumar Aiyer of Nuvoco Vistas emphasised that low-carbon cement development cannot be treated as a single-variable exercise. Cement must perform in real construction conditions. It must deliver strength, durability, consistency and cost competitiveness, while also reducing carbon.
“The root of understanding and balancing all these aspects lies in materials, and knowing the materials,” he said.
According to Dr Aiyer, R&D teams must understand the variability of raw materials such as fly ash, slag and clinker. Different sources produce different material behaviours. This makes mix optimisation, material characterisation and processing-property relationships critical. When performance is affected, cement manufacturers must understand how strength enhancers, admixtures and other performance chemicals interact with the material system.
He also linked material science with process efficiency. Clinkerisation takes place at extremely high temperatures, around 1,400 to 1,450 degrees Celsius. Any improvement in raw mix design, process control or energy optimisation can, therefore, help reduce emissions and cost. Dr Aiyer pointed to artificial intelligence-based optimisation, Cement 4.0 tools and advanced software as important enablers for real-time process and material control.
“The more you understand the materials, the more you can control it,” he said.
LC3: The promise is proven, the sequencing is not
Limestone calcined clay cement, commonly referred to as LC3, has attracted global attention because it can reduce clinker content significantly by using calcined clay and limestone while maintaining performance in many applications. Kiranmai Sanagavarapu of Fuller Technologies said the technology itself has already moved beyond proof of concept. Fuller Technologies has worked with calcined clay technology for nearly two decades and has seen plants running in France and Ghana. These plants, she said, are meeting local and national specifications, while the economics are beginning to make sense.
“The calciner is performing, the economics is stacking up, it is making business sense to produce,” she said.
But if the technology is viable, why has adoption not scaled faster? For Sanagavarapu, the answer lies in project sequencing. Too often, clay characterisation happens after equipment is specified. This, she warned, is a backward approach because calciner design depends on clay mineralogy, kaolinite content, iron levels, reactivity, moisture and other variables.
“If you don’t know what your deposit looks like before you commit for the equipment, you are, in a way, going blind into designing,” she said.
She also identified permitting and plant integration as major bottlenecks. Environmental clearances, mining permissions and local regulatory approvals must begin early. Similarly, calcined clay must be integrated into existing grinding, blending and logistics systems from the design stage, not treated as an afterthought during commissioning.
India already has IS 18189:2023 standard for LC3, but Sanagavarapu pointed out that the standard is not yet visible enough in procurement documents. “The gap between what is technically being permitted and what the procurement is asking is the single biggest bottleneck,” she said.
In her view, successful scale-up depends on getting the sequence right: clay characterisation first, permitting in parallel, standards aligned with construction, and integration built into plant design.
India’s LC3 journey: Progress, but demand remains thin
Providing details of India’s LC3 commercialisation experience, Vaibhav Rathi of GIZ noted that JK Cement carried out the first commercial production of LC3 at its Rajasthan plant, followed by JK Lakshmi Cement three months later. These initiatives were supported by the International Climate Initiative of the Government of Germany, with IIT Delhi contributing deep institutional knowledge on LC3 research and BIS certification.
Rathi said India’s early experience has produced clear lessons. One of the biggest was the need to build capacity among regulators. While BIS certification existed, State Pollution Control Boards were unfamiliar with the technology and unsure about the approval pathway.
“The capacity building is not just needed amongst the producer and the users of the cement, but also the regulators who are working with this technology for the first time,” he said.
He also highlighted the need for better information on China clay deposits. Since China clay is currently classified as a minor mineral, centralised data on availability, quality and location is limited. If cement manufacturers are to adopt LC3 at scale, stronger mineral intelligence will be important.
The third issue is demand. LC3 has already been used in projects such as Palava City in Mumbai and Noida International Airport, but these remain limited examples. “It is in a chicken and egg situation,” Rathi said. “Cement companies are saying we need more demand, and users are saying there is not enough cement available.”
Public procurement, he suggested, could help break this cycle. If agencies such as CPWD and other public bodies begin testing, accepting and specifying LC3, it could create the market confidence needed for cement companies to invest in production and storage.
Building codes must catch up with innovation
Dr Sunita Purushottam of GBPN India argued that material choices will determine built environment emissions over the long term, but India’s current policy signals remain fragmented. Although LC3 has received BIS recognition, she pointed out that building codes, municipal bylaws, schedules of rates and sustainability codes do not yet provide uniform guidance on low-carbon cement.
“The current cement regulations are largely prescriptive and favouring traditional materials,” she said. This limits the ability of alternative materials to compete on performance, durability and emissions.
Dr Purushottam also raised the issue of taxation. Cement, including LC3, currently falls under the same GST bracket as conventional cement. A differentiated tax structure, she argued, could help accelerate market adoption. “In order for the market to demand LC3, that differentiation in the GST could go a long way,” she said.
She noted that green building certifications such as IGBC and GRIHA are already creating demand for low-carbon materials by assigning points for embodied carbon and sustainable material use. However, she said large-scale adoption will require regulatory mandates, particularly through building codes and state-level notifications.
She also cautioned that low-carbon cement alone does not solve the entire building performance problem. A material may reduce embodied carbon, but the operational carbon of a building depends on thermal performance, design, insulation and energy use. “The energy part has two elements,” she said. “One is the embodied carbon of the material itself, and the other is the operational carbon.”
Collaboration is the bridge between invention and impact
Wattal said GCCA sees innovation as a strategic priority and works through platforms that connect industry with academia and start-ups. “There is no way we will decarbonise our sector without innovation,” she said.
However, she stressed that research must be connected to actual industry challenges. Innovations developed in isolation may fail when they encounter real-world barriers such as raw material variability, plant integration, cost, standards and finance. Start-ups, too, need industry mentorship and scale-up pathways.
Wattal also flagged the importance of finance. Even strong technologies may struggle to attract investment if there is no common understanding of bankability. “We have always put projects into, is this a bankable project? But the definition of a bankable project has never been defined,” she said.
For India, she saw strong potential in its academic and start-up ecosystem, but said the challenge lies in alignment and prioritisation. The country has the research base, industrial capacity and market size. What it now needs is a coordinated route from innovation to deployment.
There is a practical concern for cement manufacturers: how can existing plants be adapted for lower emissions without compromising reliability or commercial viability?
Kiranmai Sanagavarapu addressed, “The reliability risk in calcined clay retrofit is definitely real, but it is almost always self-inflicted. The risk arises when a new process is added to an existing circuit without properly redesigning grinding and blending configurations.”
Existing cement plants, she explained, can take two broad routes. The first is external sourcing of calcined clay combined with mill optimisation. This requires lower capital investment and can potentially move in 12 to 18 months if other conditions are in place. It may reduce emissions by around 20 to 30 per cent. The second route is integrated calcination on site, which requires higher capital expenditure and longer lead times, but provides greater control over quality, supply and emissions reduction potential.
For Sanagavarapu, the principle is simple: low-carbon retrofits must be designed with intent. “Design it with an intent properly from the start. Start in the market conditions where the economics are already working,” she said.
Circularity: The overlooked advantage
According to Vaibhav Rathi, fly ash and slag are already well established in cement and construction (C&D), but construction and demolition waste remains underutilised. “C&D waste is a growing business opportunity which not many have taken up,” he said. India’s continuous construction and demolition activity creates huge volumes of waste, much of which contributes to air pollution, land degradation and material inefficiency. With the right processing and standards, this waste can be converted into useful construction products.
Rathi also pointed out that LC3 has a circular economy dimension that is often overlooked. It can use low-grade kaolin-rich clay left behind after high-grade clay is extracted for other applications. “LC3 is not only a low-carbon solution, but also a circular economy solution,” he said.
At the same time, he cautioned that LC3 in India is not yet cheap because it has not reached scale. Site-specific techno-commercial feasibility studies, supported jointly by development agencies and industry, could help companies assess whether LC3 production makes technical and financial sense at a given location.
Dr Purushottam added that India must address both low-carbon cement and construction waste together. “Both low-carbon cement and C&D waste go hand in hand. India does not have an option but to work on both,” she said.
Dr Aiyer called for policy shifts from both government and industry, including preferential purchasing of sustainable materials, minimum supplementary cementitious material requirements in public and public-private projects, and faster regulatory implementation. “If we can fast-track the regulatory standards and their implementation on the ground, that is the way to go,” he said.
From green ambition to green construction
Cement innovation is no longer only about chemistry. It is about systems. Low-carbon cement will scale only when technology, standards, procurement, finance, regulation, education and construction practice move together.
LC3 and other low-carbon technologies have shown promise. India has early commercial examples, strong research capability and growing market interest. But mainstream adoption will depend on whether demand can be created, regulators can be capacitated, standards can be embedded in procurement, and manufacturers can see a clear business case.
For a country building at India’s scale, the opportunity is enormous. Cement will continue to be central to infrastructure and urban development. The challenge now is to ensure that the cement used in India’s growth story carries a lower carbon burden.
Rakesh Rao
Participate in Cement Expo 2026 and discover how next-gen infrastructure can be built with innovations in cement.
JK Cement gained after being declared preferred bidder for the Gilund Limestone Block in Chittorgarh, Rajasthan, a lease area of 370.96 hectares. The firm saw its shares trade at Rs. 5550.05, up by 28.45 points or 0.52 per cent from the previous close of Rs. 5521.60 on the BSE. The scrip opened at Rs. 5569.15 and touched a high of Rs. 5625.00 and a low of Rs. 5531.00.
The stock recorded turnover of 1742 shares on the counter and the BSE group A stock with face value Rs. 10 has a 52 week high of Rs. 7565.00 on 20-Aug-2025 and a 52 week low of Rs. 4670.05 on 12-Jun-2026. Last one week high and low stood at Rs. 5625.00 and Rs. 5329.00 respectively. The promoters holding in the company stood at 45.66 per cent, while institutions and non-institutions held 40.61 per cent and 13.73 per cent respectively.
The e-auction conducted by the Government of Rajasthan resulted in the company being declared preferred bidder for the mining lease, and the allocation will enable the company to plan phased development of the deposit, subject to regulatory approvals. The Gilund block spans 370.96 hectares and its allocation is intended to support raw material security for the company’s cement operations in the region. The designation follows the government auction process and will allow the company to plan development and integration of the deposit into its supply chain.
The current market capitalisation stands at Rs. 430.38 billion (bn), reflecting market response to the mining news and prevailing valuation levels for the sector. Investors and analysts will watch for formal allotment and related disclosures that can clarify timelines, capital expenditure and expected production profiles. The report is intended for informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice, and market participants are advised to consult advisers before making decisions.
