Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society vs State of Rajasthan
- SCC(2022) 16 SCC 581
- Neutral2021 INSC 717
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
1. Where the State has been restrained by court order from permitting mining without scientific replenishment study and environmental clearance, subsequent grant of mining leases in breach of that order—particularly where the majority of such leases are located within 100 metres of river beds—constitutes action in violation of the court's directive and the applicable sand mining guidelines, and such leases located within 5 km of river beds and those where lease conditions have been violated must be terminated forthwith. 2. Mining leases in Khatedari lands granted in close proximity to river banks facilitate the legalization and transportation of sand illegally extracted from riverbeds in violation of mining plans, and accordingly no fresh Khatedari leases shall be granted except for Palaeo deposits without the approval of this Court. 3. Under the "Polluter Pays" principle, compensation and penalty imposed for illegal mining must extend beyond the value of the illegally-mined mineral to include the cost of restoration of environmental degradation and the cost of ecological services, as remediation of damaged environment is part of the process of Sustainable Development. 4. Where the basis for exemplary penalty has not been adequately stated, the authority recommending such penalty must follow the directions given by the National Green Tribunal respecting the methodology for determining scale of compensation for illegal mining and the provisions of applicable sand mining guidelines before the penalty can be imposed.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1 | Page
(ii) Specific safeguard measures required to minimise the likely adverse impacts of mining on environment with specific reference to impact on water bodies as well as groundwater so as to ensure sustainable mining.
(iii) To evolve model guidelines so as to address mining as well as environmental concerns in a balanced manner for their adoption and implementation by all the mineral-producing States. ”
2. A report was submitted by the Core Group on the basis
of which several recommendations were made by the MoEFCC
relating to sand mining in March, 2010. Later, Model
Guidelines on “Environmental Aspects of Quarrying of Minor
Minerals” were formulated in 2010 for sustainable mining of
minor minerals, along with draft rules titled Minor Minerals
Conservation and Development Rules, 2010. In Deepak
Kumar v. State of Haryana1, this Court directed the State
Governments and Union Territories to implement the
recommendations made by the MoEFCC in its report of March,
2010 and the Model Guidelines framed by the Ministry of
Mines within a period of six weeks from the date of the
judgment. The State Governments and Union Territories were
also directed to frame necessary rules under Section 15 of the
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957
(“MMDR Act”). The above directions were issued by this
1 (2012) 4 SCC 629 2 | Page Court after recording the deleterious effects of sand mining on
biodiversity, such as destabilization of the soil structure of
river banks and loss of habitat, to name a few.
3. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in
Deepak Kumar (supra), the Rajasthan Minor Mineral
Concession Rules, 1986 (“1986 Rules”) were amended by
notifications dated 23.05.2012, 19.06.2012 and 21.06.2012.
By the said notifications, mining leases for sand were to be
given by tender / auction for a period of five years. Letters of
Intent (“LoIs”) were to be issued to the eligible applicants by
the competent authority and the eligible applicants were
required to submit the requisite No Objection Certificates,
Environmental Clearance (“EC”) and approved mining plan. As
the grant of EC was likely to be delayed, the State of
Rajasthan incorporated a provision in the 1986 Rules by way
of the amendment dated 21.06.2012, permitting sand mining
through the then existing system of Royalty Collection
Contract and issue of Temporary Work Permit, till EC is
granted.
4. A total of 130 mining plots were identified for conduct of
auction for sand mining. Tenders were received for 105 plots.
LoIs were issued to each of the successful bidders with respect
to the105 plots, who were further directed to submit a mining
application and obtain EC under the notification dated
3 | Page 14.09.2006 issued by the MoEFCC (“EIA Notification, 2006”)
and submit the same within a period of 12 months. Between
November, 2013 and March, 2016, 65 out of the 82 LoI holders
presented final Environment Management Plant (EMP) after
Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) study and public
hearing. The Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) constituted
under the EIA Notification, 2006 by the MoEFCC recommended
grant of EC to these 65 LoI holders. As EC was not granted by
the MoEFCC to most of the LoI holders within a period of six
months, the State of Rajasthan sought for extension of time
for continuing the then existing system of sand mining by way
of Royalty Collection Contract. The High Court refused the
request made by the State Government by an order dated
21.10.2013. Aggrieved thereby, the State Government filed
SLP (C) No. 34134 of 2013 before this Court. This Court
passed an interim order dated 25.11.2013 permitting the 82
LoI holders, who had submitted their applications for obtaining
EC to the MoEFCC, to carry on mining operations in
accordance with the notification dated 21.06.2012 amending
the 1986 Rules. Temporary Work Permits were issued to 80 out
of the 82 LoI holders to carry on mining operations pursuant to
the said interim order. The interim order dated 25.11.2013
was extended by this Court on 24.02.2014 and 27.03.2014.
Ultimately, by an order dated 16.11.2017, this Court
4 | Page restrained all the 82 mining lease / quarry holders from
carrying on mining of sand and bajri, unless a scientific
replenishment study is completed and EC is granted by the
MoEFCC. This Court was concerned about the continuation of
mining without EC. The State Government stopped the mining
activities pursuant to the order passed by this Court on
16.11.2017.
5. Shortly after, a notification was issued by the State of
Rajasthan on 28.12.2017 with respect to Rule 51 of the
Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 (“2017
Rules”), permitting grant of short-term permits for excavation
of sand in Khatedari lands only for Government-related works
or organisations aided by the Government. The 2017 Rules
were amended on 25.06.2018 by which Rule 17A was
inserted, enabling the Government to grant mining lease in
Khatedari lands to Khatedars.
6. On 28.02.2018, sub-rule (4) of Rule 5 of the 2017 Rules
was amended. By the said amendment, the time period of
one year for fulfilment of the conditions of the LoIs, including
execution and registration of mining lease, was extended to
13 months from the date of commencement of the 2017
Rules, failing which the rights of the applicants would stand
forfeited. According to the State Government, the LoIs of 74
members of the Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society had
5 | Page lapsed owing to non-fulfilment of conditions within the period
of 13 months. The remaining 8 LoI holders, who had been
issued EC and subsequently granted mining leases, could not
continue with mining operations without the requisite
replenishment study reports.
7. The Bajri Lease LoI Holders Welfare Society challenged
the vires of sub-rule (4) of Rule 5 of the 2017 Rules in the High
Court of Rajasthan. On 09.04.2019, the High Court dismissed
the writ petitions. Thereafter, the Petitioner-Society filed SLP
(C) No.10587 of 2019 assailing the judgment of the High
Court. Notice was issued in the matter and an interim order
was passed on 10.05.2019 restraining cancellation of the LoIs
of the members of the Petitioner-Society. On 19.02.2020, this
Court, taking note of the scale of the issue of illegal sand
mining in the State of Rajasthan, directed the Central
Empowered Committee (“CEC”) to submit a report on the
problems relating to sand mining that are faced by traders,
consumers, transporters, the State and other stakeholders and
also on measures to stop illegal sand mining.
8. The CEC submitted its report to this Court dated
23.12.2020, in which the following recommendations have
been made:
“A. All the Khatedari leases located within 5 kms from the river bank as well as leases where violation of the
6 | Page lease conditions including misuse of e-ravannas are detected are terminated forthwith and the State Government shall not issue fresh Khatedari leases except for Palaeo deposits in the District of Binaker without the approval of this Hon’ble Court.
B. The State Government shall dispense with the Excess Royalty Collection Contract system in respect of any kind of sand mining leases forthwith and the royalty shall be paid on line by the lessee to the State Government and generate royalty paid e-ravanna before transporting of sand from the mining site;
C. The MoEF&CC will issue EC in respect of all the valid LoI holders recommended by the EAC in its meeting held during 2014-2016 without insisting on submission of scientific study report as a precondition for grant of EC within a period of three months. MoEF&CC shall also prescribe detailed methodology in consultation with CMPDI for undertaking replenishment study during the course of mining as discussed in para 11 (iii) of this Report.
D. River sand mining in Rajasthan is permitted to be conducted after obtaining all statutory clearances and payment of dues and applicable taxes following the procedure listed in para 11 (iii) of this report.
E. The MoEF&CC shall arrange for scrutiny of the DSR prepared as provided in MoEF&CC Guidelines of 2016 and 2020 and the production figures approved in the
7 | Page DSR are scrupulously followed by the authorities under the EP Act 1986 while issuing the EC.
F. The period of actual mining of sand under TWP should be adjusted against the five-year lease period.
G. Government of Rajasthan will constitute an Empowered Committee headed by the Chief Secretary to consider and settle claims of excess payments collected from the LoI holders during the period of working under TWP. The Committee shall examine each of the cases and take a decision in this regard within a period of six months from the date of orders. Monthly progress reports in this regard may be sent to CEC.
H. The State Government will auction the sand mining leases after proper ground demarcation and after assessing the extractable sand resources as given in the approved DSR and after obtaining no objection certificates from all concerned authorities. The sale of mining blocks objected to by any of the government departments shall not be put up for tender/auction.
I. State Government to review the amendments to Rule 5(4) of RMMCR, 2017 so that it will not be an impediment for execution of sand mining lease.
J. For brazen violation of this Hon’ble Court order dated 16.11.2017 exemplary penalty of Rs.10 lakhs per vehicle and Rs.5 lakhs per cu.m of sand seized 8 | Page may be imposed as a deterrent. This will be in addition to what has already been ordered/collected by the State agencies as penalty/compensation.
K. State Government of Rajasthan is directed to conduct drone survey in respect of all the remaining Khatedari leases and complete the same within the next four months to assess the irregularities if any committed by them. A copy of this Report may also be made available to CEC.”
9. The State of Rajasthan has filed Interlocutory Application
No. 29984 of 2021 requesting this Court to accept the
recommendations made by the CEC in respect of all points,
except recommendations ‘A’ and ‘J’. Recommendation ‘A’
relates to termination of Khatedari leases within 5 km of the
river bank and restriction on the State Government to grant
fresh Khatedari leases without the approval of this Court.
Recommendation ‘J’ pertains to exemplary penalty of Rs.10
lakh per vehicle and Rs.5 lakh per cubic metre of sand seized
for violation of the order passed by this Court on 16.11.2017.
10. The reasons given by the State of Rajasthan for its
objection to the recommendation made by the CEC for
cancellation of Khatedari leases is that mineral wealth lying in
agricultural land should also be utilized. The State
Government has brought to the notice of this Court that a
request was made to the MoEFCC to revisit the Enforcement &
9 | Page Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020 (“2020 Sand
Mining Guidelines”) regarding excavation of sand within the
periphery of 5 km from the river bed. In view of scanty rain
fall patterns in the State, the submission of the State is that
mining leases in agricultural fields should be permitted.
Insofar as additional penalty recommended by the CEC for the
illegal sand mining and transportation is concerned, the State
is of the opinion that the penalties recommended are
excessive and their recovery would be difficult.
11. Interlocutory Application No. 54981 of 2021 seeking
intervention has been filed on behalf of 10 Khatedars who
asserted that no illegal sand mining is being carried on by
them. It was argued on their behalf that these Khatedars
have been acting in accordance with the conditions of their
lease. It was contended that the CEC committed an error in
recommending cancellation of their mining leases. The said
Khatedars found fault with recommendation ‘C’ of the CEC in
favour of the LoI holders.
12. The CEC, in its report, has highlighted the delay in the
grant of EC by the MoEFCC to the LoI holders as the cause for
widening the gap in demand and supply of sand, which has
resulted in proliferation of illegal sand mining activities to
meet the shortfall in supply. The recommendation made by
the CEC is that the MoEFCC will issue EC in respect of all the
10 | P a g e valid LoI holders recommended by the EAC, within a period of
three months, without insisting on submission of the scientific
replenishment study report as a pre-condition for the grant of
EC, with the replenishment study due to be undertaken during
the course of mining.
13. In spite of the order passed by this Court on 16.11.2017
that no river sand shall be permitted unless a scientific
replenishment study is completed and EC is granted, 194
mining leases of Khatedari lands have been granted in the
State of Rajasthan, with most of these lands being in close
proximity of the river banks of the State. 114 Khatedari leases
are within a distance of 100 metres or less from the river bank
and only 23 Khatedari leases have been granted beyond a
distance of 5 km from the river bank. The CEC has stated in
its report that the agricultural lands do not have deposits of
quality sand suitable for construction, being a mixture of sand,
silt and clay. The Khatedars have been exploiting the
locational proximity to the river banks by excavating sand
from the river bed, instead of restricting the mining to their
leasehold areas, completely in violation of the mining plan.
The quantity of sand is in excess of the permissible limit which
is transported by being shown as having been mined in the
Khatedari lands. The CEC has commented upon the
involvement of sand mafia in the trade of sand illegally mined
11 | P a g e by the Khatedars as well as the involvement of authorities in
the State of Rajasthan. Therefore, the CEC has recommended
the cancellation of all Khatedari leases located within 5 km
from the river banks as well as those leases where violation of
lease conditions including misuse of e-ravannas are detected.
The CEC further recommended that no fresh Khatedari leases
shall be granted, except for Palaeo deposits, without the
approval of this Court.
14. Section 23C of the MMDR Act empowers the State
Governments to make rules for preventing illegal mining,
transportation and storage of minerals. This Court in Deepak
Kumar (supra) directed the State Governments / Union
Territories to formulate rules in accordance with the Model
Guidelines. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court and
the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”), the Sustainable Sand
Mining Management Guidelines, 2016 were issued (“2016
Sand Mining Guidelines”). The responsibility for
implementation of the said Guidelines was placed on the State
Governments which had to create a mechanism to measure
the mined-out mineral and its transportation and also to
ensure that the amount of mineral mined does not exceed the
quantity permitted in the EC. The 2016 Sand Mining
Guidelines recommended use of Transport Permits with bar
codes, for generation of reports showing the daily lifting of
12 | P a g e sand and user performance reports. Transport Permits with
bar codes would also enable vehicles carrying sand to be
tracked from source to destination. Dissatisfied with the
ineffective monitoring mechanism, failure of the Mines
Surveillance System as well as lack of an effective institutional
monitoring mechanism not only at the stage of the grant of EC
but at subsequent stages with respect to illegal sand mining,
the NGT, in an order dated 05.04.2019 in National Green
Tribunal Bar Association v. Virender Singh in OA No. 360
of 2015 and connected matters, directed the MoEFCC and the
State Governments to review extant monitoring mechanisms
and consider revision of the 2016 Sand Mining Guidelines.
Consequently, the MoEFCC issued the 2020 Sand Mining
Guidelines.
15. The damage caused to the environment due to rampant
unscientific illegal mining needs no reiteration. Unabated
illegal mining has resulted in the emergence of sand mafia
who have been conducting illegal mining in the manner of
organized criminal activities and have been involved in brutal
attacks against members of local communities, enforcement
officials, reporters and social activists for objecting to unlawful
sand excavation. The statistics provided by the State
Government highlights the magnitude of the problem as about
2411 FIRs have been registered in relation to illegal mining in
13 | P a g e the State of Rajasthan, between 16.11.2017 and 30.01.2020.
When this Court has restrained 82 mining lease / quarry
holders from carrying on mining of sand and bajri unless a
scientific replenishment study is completed and EC is issued
by the MoEFCC, the State of Rajasthan ought not to have
issued mining leases in favour of the Khatedars. It is clear
from the report of the CEC that the majority of the Khatedari
leases are within 100 metres from the river bed. The 2020
Sand Mining Guidelines prescribe that mining plan for mining
leases on Khatedari lands shall only be approved if there is a
possibility of replenishment of the mineral or when there is no
possibility of river bed mining within 5 km of the patta land /
Khatedari land. Agreeing with the CEC’s conclusions on the
issue of mining leases in Khatedari lands facilitating
legalisation of transportation and sale of illegally extracted
sand, we approve the recommendation of the CEC that all
Khatedari leases which are located within 5 km from the river
bed and those leases where lease conditions have been
violated have to be terminated forthwith and that Khatedari
leases shall be granted only with the permission of this Court.
16. The CEC has recommended imposition of exemplary
penalty of Rs.10 lakh per vehicle and Rs.5 lakh per cubic
metre of sand seized, which would be in addition to what has
already been ordered / collected by the State agencies as
14 | P a g e compensation. Compensation / penalty to be paid by those
indulging in illegal sand mining cannot be restricted to the
value of illegally-mined minerals. The cost of restoration of
environment as well as the cost of ecological services should
be part of the compensation. The “Polluter Pays” principle as
interpreted by this Court means that the absolute liability for
harm to the environment extends not only to compensate the
victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the
environmental degradation. Remediation of the damaged
environment is part of the process of “Sustainable
Development” and as such the polluter is liable to pay the
cost to the individual sufferers as well as the cost of reversing
the damaged ecology.2
17. The scale of compensation by those who are involved in
illegal mining has been dealt with by the NGT in National
Green Tribunal Bar Association v. Virender Singh
(supra). In its order dated 26.02.2021, the NGT considered and
approved the Report submitted by the Central Pollution
Control Board dated 30.01.2020, in pursuance of its earlier
orders, on scale of compensation to be recovered for violation
of norms for mining on “Polluter Pays” principle. Additionally,
para 9.2 of the 2020 Sand Mining Guidelines provides as
follows:
2 Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India & Ors. (1996) 5 SCC 647 15 | P a g e “The environmental damages incurred or resulting due to illegal mining shall be assessed by a committee constituted by District Administration having expertise from relevant fields, and also having independent representation of locals and State Pollution Control Board. Guidelines for assessment of ecological damages prescribed by the State Government or Concerned Pollution Control Boards or any other authority shall be applicable and compensation as fixed shall be paid by the project proponent, in light of Hon’ble National Green Tribunal orders.”
18. Section 21(5) of the MMDR Act empowers the State
Government to recover the price of the illegally-mined
mineral, in addition to recovery of rent, royalty or tax. The
penalty recommended by the CEC for illegal sand mining is in
addition to the penalty that can be imposed by the State
Government in terms of Section 21(5) of the Act. However, the
basis for imposition of exemplary penalty of Rs. 10 lakh per
vehicle and Rs. 5 lakh per cubic metre of sand has not been
stated by the CEC in its report. The CEC is directed to follow
the directions given by the NGT in respect of imposition of
penalty / determining scale of compensation for illegal mining
and the provisions of the 2020 Sand Mining Guidelines and
determine the penalty / compensation afresh and submit a
report to this Court within a period of eight weeks from today.
16 | P a g e
19. The recommendations made by the CEC, except
recommendation ‘J’, are approved for implementation
forthwith. IA No. 29984 of 2021 and IA No. 54981 of 2021 are
disposed of.
20. SLP (C) No. 10587 of 2019 and SLP (C) No. 10670 of
2019 are directed to be listed after eight weeks.
...................................J. [ L. NAGESWARA RAO ]
.............................J. [ SANJIV KHANNA ]
.......................J. [ B.R. GAVAI ]
New Delhi, November 11, 2021.
17 | P a g e
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free