Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. NAGESWARA RAO, SANJIV KHANNA, B.R. GAVAI, JJ.
The State of Bihar and Others – Appellants
Versus
Pawan Kumar and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 3661-3662 of 2020
Decided On : 10-11-2021
Environment Protection – Illegal Mining Activities – Invitation of tenders without preparing DSR for sand mining lease – Though developmental activities are not stalled, environmental issues are also required to be addressed – A balanced approach of sustainable development ensuring environmental safeguards, needs to be resorted to – At the same time, it also cannot be ignored that when legal mining is banned, it gives rise to mushroom growth of illegal mining, resulting into clashes between sand mafias, criminalization and at times, loss of human lives – It also cannot be disputed that sand is required for construction of public infrastructural projects as well as public and private construction activities – Total ban on legal mining, apart from giving rise to illegal mining, also causes huge loss to public exchequer – In accordance with 2020 guidelines, DSR is required to be prepared before auction/e-auction/grant of mining lease by Mining Department or Department dealing with mining activity in respective States – Potential site for mining having its impact on forest, protected area, habitation and bridges should be avoided – For this, a sub-divisional committee is required to be formed which, after site visit, is required to decide regarding suitability of sites for mining – With advent of modern technology, various technological gadgets like Drones and satellite imaging etc. can be used for identification of potential sites and preparation of DSR and also to check misuse and unauthorized mining – When 2020 guidelines as well as notification issued by MoEF and CC of 2016 itself provide for constitution of sub-divisional committees comprising of officers of State Government from various Departments for identification of potential sites for mining, there would be no necessity of DSRs being prepared through private consultants as directed by Tribunal in the impugned order – Direction in that regard issued by Tribunal modified – Directions issued. (Paras 7, 10, 12, 13 and 14)
Facts of the case:
Present appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 14th October 2020, passed by National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 40/2020/EZ with O.A. No. 57/2020/EZ. Appellant State of Bihar has assailed the said judgment and order dated 14th October 2020, on various grounds.
Findings of Court:
Until the DSRs are finalized and granted approval by SEAC and SEIAA, it is appropriate that certain necessary arrangements are permitted so that the State can continue with legal mining activities. This apart from preventing illegal mining activities, would also ensure that the public exchequer is not deprived of its share in legalized mining.
Result : Directions issued.
ORDER :
1. The present appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 14th October 2020, passed by the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in O.A. No. 40/2020/EZ with O.A. No. 57/2020/EZ, thereby issuing the following directions:
(ii) As the DEIAA is not functioning as a consequence of the decision of the Tribunal in Satendra Pandey (supra), the DSR shall be prepared through a consultants accredited by the National Accreditation Board of Education and Training/Quality Control Council of India in terms of O.M. of MoEF and CC dated 16.03.2010.
(iii) The DSR so prepared shall be submitted to the District Magistrate who shall verify the DSR only in respect of the relevant facts pertaining to the physical and geographical features of the district which shall be distinct from the scientific findings based on the parameters prescribed in the SSMMG-2016. After such verification, the District Magistrate shall forward the DSR for examination and evaluation by the State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC) having regarding to the fact that the SEIAA comprises of technical/scientific experts. The SEAC after appraisal of the report shall forward it to the SEIAA for consideration and approval if it meets all scientific/technical requirements.
(iv) While preparing the DSR, the MoEF and CC Accredited Agency/Consultant shall scrupulously follow the procedure and the parameters laid down under the SSMMG-2016 and EMGSM-2020 read in sync with each other.”
2. The appellant-State of Bihar has assailed the said judgment and order dated 14th October 2020, on various grounds.
3. Shri Atmaram Nadkarni, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Bihar submitted that the Tribunal has grossly erred in holding that unless the State Expert Appraisal Committee (hereinafter referred to as “SEAC”) and the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (hereinafter referred to as “SEIAA”) grants approval to the District Survey Report (hereinafter referred to as “DSR”) for the purpose of mining of sand, the same cannot be carried out. He submitted that the Tribunal has further held that the very invitation of the tenders without preparing the DSR in accordance with the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Satendra Pandey vs. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and Another, O.A. No. 186 of 2016 (M.A. No. 350/2016) could not have been done. He submitted that after the tenders are invited in accordance with the DSR prepared by the District Level Committee, the successful bidder will be required to prepare a mining plan and unless such a mining plan is approved by SEAC and SEIAA, the Environmental Clearance would not be granted and in turn, mining activities cannot be carried out. He submitted that the finding of the Tribunal is like putting the cart before the horse. He further submitted that the Tribunal has also grossly erred in holding that the DSRs prepared by the State were without following the requisite procedure and without considering the relevant factors. He submitted that not only the procedure as prescribed under the relevant rules and regulations was complied with, but the voluminous material in support of the same was also placed on record before the Tribunal. He submitted that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the said material. He therefore submitted that the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal dated 14th October 2020, needs to be set aside and the State needs to be permitted to finalize the tenders received by it.
4. Shri Nadkarni further submitted that on account of the orders passed by the Tribunal, the old lessees are continuing with the mining activities by paying a meagre amount to the State Government. He therefore submitted that on account of this, a huge loss would be caused to
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
