T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors
- SCC(2010) 1 SCC 500
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where mining operations on leased land have caused environmental damage or disturbance, this Court may, in exercise of its powers to protect natural resources and prevent ecological harm, suspend or deny renewal of mining rights even where the licensee claims not to have violated specific rules, and instead direct reclamation and rehabilitation of the degraded area before permitting any future mining activity on different land under new conditions set by the Court. Where a leaseholder has failed to conduct reclamation and rehabilitation work required by Rule 27 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 and Form-K thereof, the Court may hold the leaseholder liable for rehabilitation of the degraded area and require the State to pursue reparatory and compensatory measures, notwithstanding the leaseholder's claim that their own operations complied with rules. Where mining in a sensitive ecological area has caused widespread environmental devastation, the Court may condition any future mining permission on: the submission and Court approval of a reclamation and rehabilitation plan prepared by the State before operations commence; submission of statutory clearances including environmental clearance and Forest Conservation Act approval; and regular monitoring reports by an independent agency, with closure of operations as a consequence of breach of these conditions.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
MINOR MINERALS AND CONSTRUCTION MATTERS IN HARYANA MINING: I.A Nos.839, 840, 850, 853-854, 855-856, 866-868, 869-870, 871-872, 873-874, 875-876, 877-878, 879-880, 881-882, 891-892, 900, 905, 1276-1277, 1590, 1612-1613, 1700-1703, 2007-2008, 1488, 2138-2139 in 891-892, 2205, 2445, 2567, 2574 in 875-876, 2536,2636 in 879- 880,265802659 in 828, 2719 IN 1488 IN 891-92 in 828 and in WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO(s). 202 OF 1995
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS Respondent(s)
AND I.A.No.2198 @ Conmt.Pet.No.125/2006 vide Court's order dt.25.10.2007
WITH I.A.No.2269 in W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
AND I.A.No.2393 IN I.A.NO.2269 in I.A.NO.1785 in W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
AND I.A.No.2270 IN I.A.NO.1785 in W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
AND C.P.(C)No.186/2003 in W.P.(C)NO.4677/1985
AND I.A.No.1866 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.1858-1859 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.1886 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.1888 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.1891 to 1893 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.1895 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.1896 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.NO.1906 in W.P.(C)NO.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.1907-1908 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.1911-1912 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.NO.1937 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985 2
WITH I.A.NO.1938 in W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2306-2307 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2308-2309 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2310 in I.A.2269 in 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.1968 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2334-2335 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.2336 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.D.58737 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
AND I.A.Nos.2374-2376 in IA 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2377-2380 in IA 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2381, 2382, 2383, 2384 in IA 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.Nos.2386-2387 in IA 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.2390 in IA 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.2392 IN IA 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.No.2415 in I.A. 1785 IN W.P.(C)No.4677/1985
WITH I.A.NO.2103 in W.P.(C)NO.4677/1985
WITH W.P.(C)No.624/2002 W.P.(C)No.661/2002 W.P.(C)No.428/2002
WITH CONMT.PET.(C)No.568/2002 in W.P.(C)NO.428/2002
WITH CONMT.PET.(C)NO.542/2004 IN W.P.(C)NO.428/2002
O R D E R
Heard both sides.
The Aravalli Hill Range has been subjected to widespread
mining activities in recent times. About 1500 ha. of land was given 3
for mining operations in Gurgaon and Mewat areas. Most of the mines
were for excavating major minerals but we are told that what the
mine operators extracted from the leased area were mostly minor
minerals. Vast areas were thus reduced to ditches, some of them
going down to a depth below the water level. The C.E.C. has filed a
report showing the extent of damage caused by the mining operations
in this area. With the help of the National Remote Sensing Centre,
Hyderabad, Department of Space, Govt. of India, maps of these areas
are prepared by using satellite imagery system. Photocopies of the
maps of these areas are produced before us from which it appears
that as a result of the mining operations, the entire area has
become highly devastated. The C.E.C. has also filed its report
indicating the extent of damage caused to this area.
There were discussions between the C.E.C. and the State of
Haryana as to what steps need be taken in regard to the mining
activities in these areas.
All mining operations in these hills were suspended by
this Court vide order dated 8th May, 2009. Now it is stated on behalf
of the State of Haryana that a complete ban on mining minerals there
would cause scarcity of building materials and the construction of
roads and buildings and other developmental activities would be
seriously affected. It was suggested that about 600 ha. of land be
set apart for extraction of minor minerals in the district of
Faridabad, including Palwal. The State Government is also facing a
problem caused by mining operations carried on in the past over an
area 1500 ha. of land in Gurgaon and Mewat. These mine operators 4
did not carry out any reclamation or rehabilitation work though they
were legally bound to do so under Rule 27 of the Mineral Concession
Rules, 1960 read with Form-K of the Mineral Concession Rules. Most
of these places have been simply abandoned. These areas have to be
reclaimed and extensive afforestation work needs to be carried out
in these areas.
Some of the mining operators, having existing licenses
that have not so far expired, raised a contention that due to
suspension of all mining operations by this Court they were not able
to conduct any mining even though they had not violated any rules or
guidelines and hence, they should be allowed to do the mining
operations in terms of the lease granted to them, more so as the
State of Haryana is proposing a Scheme for setting aside about 600
ha. of land in Faridabad for excavation of minor minerals. We do not
think it is feasible or in the larger interest to allow those
mining operators to carry out any mining activities on the basis of
the earlier licenses. Of course, they would be at liberty to
participate in the auction in respect of the 600 ha. of land in
Faridabad which would be made available for mining activities.
The C.E.C. and the State of Haryana held a meeting on
7.1.2009 and a report dated 15.1.2009 has been filed before this
Court. On the basis of the report, any mining activity in the 600
ha. of land to be identified and earmarked in Faridabad shall be
based on the following decisions taken in this meeting : 5
i) The State shall issue a Notification laying down the
guidelines and the procedure for giving licence/lease. The State
shall also establish an Aravali Rehabilitation Fund and a
Monitoring Committee. In issuing the Notification for allowing
mining operations in an area upto 600 ha. in the District of
Faridabad, including Palwal, the State must strictly adhere to all
the conditions enumerated in the Minutes of the Meeting held on
7.1.2009 between the C.E.C., State of Haryana and the Forest Survey
of India regarding mining, colonisation and related issues in
Aravali hills. It is hoped and expected that the Notification will
be issued by the State Government within a period of three months.
ii) The State of Haryana will take immediate steps for
preparation and implementation of Reclamation and Rehabilitation
Plan for the area degraded as a result of the mining activities in
that part. The rehabilitation of those areas shall be done by the
respective leaseholders. The State would also be at liberty to hold
the respective leaseholders who had not carried out the
rehabilitation work as per Rule 27 of the Mineral Concession Rules
read with Form-K of the said rules as liable for the rehabilitation
of those areas. The State shall take all reparatory and
compensatory steps in this regard.
iii) The actual mining operation in the 600 ha. of land in
Faridabad shall commence on submission of the rehabilitation and
reclamation plan by the State and its approval by this Court. It
shall be done at the earliest and preferably within a period of six
months.
6
iv) The C.E.C. shall submit quarterly reports to this Court in
regard to the commencement of the mining activities and its effect
on the surrounding areas as also in regard to the progress of the
reclamation work in the areas of Aravali range degraded by the past
mining operations.
Before any mining operations commence, the leaseholders
shall obtain all statutory clearances including environmental
clearance in terms of MoEF Notification dated 14.9.2006 and also the
approval under the Forest Conservation Act.
The Principal Secretary, Department of Mines, State of
Haryana will be responsible to ensure strict compliance of this
order. The Chief Secretary of the State shall have supervisory
control over the matter.
As regards the permission for mining activities in the
1500 ha. of land in Gurgaon and Mewat, the same will be taken up
separately considering the progress made in the rehabilitation work
to be carried out by the State in the 600 ha. of land.
In case of violation of any of these directions or failure
of the rehabilitation and reclamation process to make satisfactory
progress, this Court would consider closure of the mining activities
which are hereby permitted by this Court.
In case of any such failure, the C.E.C. may file a report
as and when required. The State would revoke all licenses in respect
for major minerals both in Faridabad and Gurgaon districts. 7
All I.A.s, writ petitions and contempt petitions relating
to minor minerals are disposed of. Consequently, all applications
for intervention and impleadment are also disposed of.
List the Construction matters on 11.12.2009.
..................CJI (K.G. BALAKRISHNAN)
...................J. (S.H. KAPADIA)
...................J. (AFTAB ALAM)
NEW DELHI;
8TH OCTOBER, 2009
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