Judgment

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) BY destroying nature, environment, man is committing matricide, having in a way killed Mother Earth. Technological excellence, growth of industries, economical gains have led to depletion of natural resources irreversibly. Indifference to the grave consequences, lack of concern and foresight have contributed in large measures to the alarming position. In the case at hand, the alleged victim is the flora and fauna in and around Kudremukh National Park, a part of the Western Ghats. The forests in the area are among 18 internationally recognized "hotspots" for biodiversity conservation in the world. IA No. 670 of 2001 was filed by Shri K. M. Chinnappa describing himself as trustee, Wildlife First.

( 2 ) THE said IA No. 670 of 2001 is an offshoot of IA No. 548 filed by learned amicus curiae questioning the correctness of orders issued by the states of Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh respectively which according to him were in violation of the provisions contained in the Wild Life (Protection) act, 1972 (in short "the Act ). By order dated 14-2-2000, operation of any order permitting removal of certain trees from national parks, game sanctuaries and forests was injuncted. Subsequently, the word "forests" was deleted.

( 3 ) IN the present IA learned amicus curiae has pointed out that notwithstanding orders passed by this Court on 12-12-1996 and 14-2-2000 mining activities were being conducted by Kudremukh Iron Ore Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") which were in clear violation of the orders passed by this Court. The main reliefs sought are:" (A) to direct Moef to withdraw the illegal temporary working permission issued by it and stop mining activities; (b) direct KIOCL to stop polluting Bhadra river due to opencast mining; (c) take action against KIOCL for illegal encroachment in the forests and for destruction of forests in Kudremukh National Park; and (d) to stop KIOCL from laying new slurry pipeline in the forests of the national park. "

( 4 ) ON 10-5-2001, this Court passed an order to the following effect:"issue notice returnable in the second week of July 2001. Mr A. D. N. Rao, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Union of India. Service be effected on Respondent 2 through Mr S. R. Hegde, Advocate and on respondent 3 by ordinary process and by registered post. The Union of India will file an affidavit within eight weeks and in the affidavit they will also state the reason as to why the Government of india having once notified the area as a national park then permit mining activity to be carried out notwithstanding this Courts order of 12-12-1996t. "

( 5 ) IT was noted that Kudremukh National Park in which mining activities were being carried out was declared to be a national park in terms of Section 35 (1) of the Act. The matter was referred to the Central Empowered committee (in short "the Committee") constituted under Section 3 of the environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (in short "the Environment Act" ). After hearing the parties and taking note of the materials placed before it the committee has recommended as follows:"after carefully considering all the views and suggestions, the exceedingly rich biodiversity of the area and investment made by kiocl, suggestion made by the learned amicus curiae, the Committee is of the view that KIOCL be asked to wind up its operations within a period of five years or on the exhaustion of the oxidized weathered secondary ore, whichever is earlier, in the already broken-up area. It is clarified that the period of 5 years would commence from 25-7-1999, when its lease had expired. The winding-up period of five years shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) Moef should prepare or get a rehabilitation and reclamation and a proper eco-restoration plan prepared for the mined area and project impact area through appropriate agency at the cost of kiocl; (ii) KIOCL shall undertake to make available funds necessary for implementing the aforesai