2009 Supreme(SC) 1006

2009(4) Supreme 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.G. Balakrishnan,CJI, Dr. Arijit Pasayat and S. H. Kapadia, JJ.
M.C. Mehta — Petitioner(s)
versus
Union of India and Ors. — Respondents
I.A. No. 2152 in in I.A. No. 1785
IN
Writ Petition (C) No. 4677 of 1985
with
I.A. No. 2186 in I.A. No. 1785 in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985
I.A. No. 2168 in I.A. No. 1785 in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985
I.A. No. 2385 in I.A. No. 1785 in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985
I.A. No. 1465, 2426-2427 in W.P. (C) No. 202/1995
Decided on : 08-05-2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Mining within the Principle of Sustainable Development comes within the concept of “balancing” whereas mining beyond the Principle of sustainable development comes within the concept of “banning”.

Headnote:Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Section 3(2)(v) – Illegal Mining in Aravallis – Order passed in M.C. Mehta1 case warranting total stoppage of mining activity in Aravallis – Inspection of, twenty six mines indicating wide scale non-compliance of statutory Rules and Regulations applicable to mines – Most of these mines failed to obtain environmental clearances and failed to submit environmental management plan – In some cases, the status of mining indicated below groundwater table – Mining pits were turned into huge groundwater lakes – In some cases, even groundwater stood extracted – Deep mining pits with large water bodies were detected – Huge amounts of overburden were also seen in the area – Issuance of Notification by MoEF banning all new mining operations including renewal leases – Plea of lessees that despite wide scale degradation being noticed by this Court in M.C. Mehta case Court did not impose complete ban on mining operations but, on the contrary, Court issued guidelines vide para 96 of the said judgment – It was argued that in the circumstances this Court could not go behind Judgment and Order dated 18.3.2004 in M.C.Mehta case – However no merit found in this argument – It is true that, complete ban was imposed on mining Aravalli hills vide Order dated 29/30.10.2002, which came to be modified by Order dated 16.12.2002 and it is equally true that, vide judgment in M.C. Mehta case (supra), this Court observed that it was not suggesting a complete ban on mining operations so long as it was possible to undertake mining operations on the sustainable development principle – At the same time, in paras 89 and 96(6) of the judgment dated 18.3.2004 this Court specifically suggested that if degradation of environment continued and reached the stage of no return, this Court may consider closure of mining activities – In other words, a gateway was provided for this Court to impose the ban in future if degradation of environment becomes irreversible – Evidence on record that in the past when mining leases were granted, requisite clearances for carrying out mining operations were not obtained which had resulted in land and environmental degradation – Despite such breaches, approvals had been granted for subsequent slots because in the past the Authorities had not taken into account the macro effect of such wide scale land and environmental degradation caused by absence of remedial measures (including rehabilitation plan) – Hence held that time had now come, to suspend mining in the above Area till statutory provisions for restoration and reclamation were duly complied with, particularly in cases where pits/quarries had been left abandoned – Order passed suspending all mining operations in the Aravalli Hill Range falling in the State of Haryana within the area of approximately 448 sq. kms. in the Districts of Faridabad and Gurgaon including Mewat till Reclamation Plan duly certified by State of Haryana, MoEF and CEC was prepared in this regard. (Paras 19 to 22)

       Facts of the Case :

        Issue in consideration in present case was whether situation (optimization of land and ecological degradation in an area admeasuring approximately 448 sq. kms. in the Aravalli Hill Range falling in the Districts of Faridabad and Gurgaon including Mewat) predicted in para 89 of the Judgment in M.C. Mehta1 case come about so as to warrant total stoppage of mining activity as stated in para 96(6) of the said judgment; and if so, what should be the duration of such ban/stoppage?

       Findings of the Court :

        It is true that, complete ban was imposed on mining Aravalli hills vide Order dated 29/30.10.2002, which came to be modified by Order dated 16.12.2002 and it is equally true that, vide judgment in M.C. Mehta case (supra), this Court observed that it was not suggesting a complete ban on mining operations so long as it is possible to undertake mining operations on the sustainable development principle (see para 57). At the same time, in paras 89 and 96(6) of the judgment dated 18.3.2004 this Court specifically suggested that if degradation of environment continues and reaches the stage of no return, this Court may consider closure of mining activities. In other words, a gateway was provided for this Court to impose the ban in future if degradation of environment becomes irreversible. Evidence on record showed that in the past when mining leases were granted, requisite clearances for carrying out mining operations were not obtained which have resulted in land and environmental degradation. Despite such breaches, approvals had been granted for subsequent slots because in the past the Authorities had not taken into account the macro effect of such wide scale land and environmental degradation caused by absence of remedial measures (including rehabilitation plan).Hence held that time had now come, to suspend mining in the above Area till statutory provisions for restoration and reclamation were duly complied with, particularly in cases where pits/quarries had been left abandoned. Order was passed suspending all mining operations in the Aravalli Hill Range falling in the State of Haryana within the area of approximately 448 sq. kms. in the Districts of Faridabad and Gurgaon including Mewat till Reclamation Plan duly certified by State of Haryana, MoEF and CEC was prepared in this regard.

       Result : Ordered accordingly.