SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 1879

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MADAN B. LOKUR, PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD - Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS - Respondent(s)
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).202/1995, I.A.NO. 3947 IN I.A.NOS. 2228-2229, I.A.NO. 3948 & 3954 IN 3947 IN W.P.(C) NO. 202/1995, I.A.NO. 1493 @ CONMT.PET.(C)NO.280/2003 IN W.P.(C) NO. 202/1995, I.A.NO. 1595-1596 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995, I.A.NO. 1870-1872 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995, I.A.NO. 2321-2322 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995, I.A.NO. 2348-2349 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995, I.A.NO. 3481-3482 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995, I.A.NO.3489-3491 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995
Decided On : 03-02-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Adv.,(A.C.)(NP) Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Adv., (A.C.) Ms. Aparjita Singh, Adv., (A.C.) Mr. Siddharth Chaudhary, Adv., (A.C.) Mr. Bavani Shankar, Adv., Ms. V.S. Lakshmi, Adv., Mr. A.V. Balan, Adv., Mr. P.K. Manohar, AOR Mr. Harish Beeran, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Ranjit Kumar, SG Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv., Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv., Mr. Ravindra Bana, Adv., Ms. Gargi Khanna, Adv., Ms. Manita Verma, Adv., Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv., Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv., Mr. P. Chaitanyashi, Adv., Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR, Mr. Mahaling Pandarge, Adv., Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, AOR, Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Adv., Mr. Manoj Joshi, Adv., Ms. Lalitha Kaushik, AOR, Ms. Anitha Shenoy, AOR, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, AOR, (NP) Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv., Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv., Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR, Mr. R.D. Upadhyay, AOR, (NP) Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, AOR, Mr. T. Harish Kumar, AOR, Mr. T. Mahipal, AOR, Mr. Tejaswani Kumar Pradhan, AOR, Mr. S.K. Badhopadhaya, Adv., Ms. Vinakshi Kadan, Adv., Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv., Ms. Christi Jain, Adv., Mr. Priyal Jain, Adv., Mrs. Pratibha Jain, AOR, Mr. Purushaindra Kaurav, AAG Mr. Mishra Saurabh, AOR, Mr. Ankit Kr. Lal, Adv., Mr. M.R. Shamshad, Adv., Mr. Rajat Singh, Adv., Mr. Aditya Samaddar, Adv., Mr. Sankar Ch. Ghosh, Adv., Ms. Reshmi Rea Sinha, Adv., Mr. Rudra Dutta, Adv., Mr. Parijat Sinha, Adv., Mr. Anip Sachthey, Adv., Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Adv., Mr. Vinayak Shukla, Adv., Ms. Kiran Dhawan, Adv., Ms. Ria Sachthey, Adv., Ms. A. Subhashini, Adv.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of obtaining statutory clearances before granting mining leases and the need for forest clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for renewal of mining leases containing forest area.

Headnote:

Environment - Public Interest Litigation - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 - [Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980] - The court addressed various applications related to environmental clearances, mining leases, and forest conservation. The court emphasized the requirement of obtaining statutory clearances before granting mining leases and the need for forest clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for renewal of mining leases containing forest area. The court accepted the recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee and directed that mining leases with forest area may be renewed only after obtaining prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and that Rule 24A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 is subject to compliance with the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

Fact of the Case:

The court addressed various applications related to environmental clearances, mining leases, and forest conservation.

Finding of the Court:

The court emphasized the requirement of obtaining statutory clearances before granting mining leases and the need for forest clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for renewal of mining leases containing forest area. The court accepted the recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee and directed that mining leases with forest area may be renewed only after obtaining prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and that Rule 24A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 is subject to compliance with the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

Issues: Environmental clearances, mining leases, forest conservation, statutory clearances, renewal of mining leases containing forest area.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for obtaining statutory clearances before granting mining leases and the requirement of forest clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for renewal of mining leases containing forest area. The court accepted the recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee and directed that mining leases with forest area may be renewed only after obtaining prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and that Rule 24A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 is subject to compliance with the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

Final Decision: The court accepted the recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee and directed that mining leases with forest area may be renewed only after obtaining prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and that Rule 24A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 is subject to compliance with the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

ORDER :

Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).202/1995 with I.A.NO.3942 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995

1. We have considered the letter dated 29.06.2016 filed by Mr. P.K. Manohar, Advocate. The letter indicates that the petitioner T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad expired on 1st June, 2016.

2. Since this is a public interest litigation, there is no question of bringing the legal representatives of the deceased on record.

3. The Registry will now list the matter as in Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. Union of India & Ors. The cause-title stands amended accordingly.

4. This disposes of the letter dated 29.06.2016.

I.A.NO.3942 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995

5. We have seen the contents of the application, the order dated 30.06.2016 received from Mr. H.C. Chaudhary, Director, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change as well as the office report.

6. It is pointed out by learned Solicitor General that the appointment of Mr. Amarnatha Shetty as Member Secretary of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) in place of Mr. M.K. Jiwrajika is proposed after consulting the learned Attorney General as well as the Chairman of the CEC.

7. We express our gratitude to Mr. M.K. Jiwrajika for the assistance rendered. The Secretary General will convey our gratitude to Mr. M.K. Jiwrajika.

8. Under the circumstances, we accept the recommendation and appoint Mr. Amarnatha Shetty as Member Secretary of CEC.

I.A.No.3942 stands disposed of.

I.A.NO. 3947 IN I.A.NOS. 2228-2229, I.A.NO. 3948 & 3954 IN 3947 IN W.P.(C) NO. 202/1995

(for modification of court's order dated 21.10.2011 passed in I.A. Nos.2228-2229 and permission to file additional documents Volume II and III and office report)

9. The admitted position is that the environmental clearance granted to the applicant, i.e., Matheran Ropeways Pvt. Ltd. in 2008 has since expired since it was valid for a period of five years only.

10. The admitted position is that on 3rd September, 2016, a fresh application was made for grant of environmental clearance for proposed Matheran Ropeway project at Village Bhutivali – Garbut – Madhavji point at Matheran, Tehsil Karjat, Dist. Raigad, Maharashtra being developed by M/s. Matheran Ropeway Pvt. Ltd. That application is still pending consideration.

11. The concerned authorities including the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change should consider the application and take a final decision thereon within a period of four weeks from today.

12. All the applications stand disposed of.

I.A.NO. 1493 @ CONMT.PET.(C)NO.280/2003 IN W.P.(C) NO. 202/1995

(for directions and office report)

13. In view of the amendment in the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, no mining lease can be granted except by way of an auction. In addition to that, the necessary statutory clearances are required to be obtained before the grant of a mining lease.

14. Under the circumstances, nothing further survives in this application, which is disposed of accordingly.

15. It is made clear that the State of Karnataka will not grant any mining lease except in accordance with the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and other statutory requirements.

I.A.NO. 1595-1596 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995

(for impleadment and directions and office report)

16. No one is present on behalf of the applicant.

17. Applications are accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution.

I.A.NO. 1870-1872 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995

(for impleadment and directions and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)

18. No one is present on behalf of the applicant.

19. Applications are accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution.

I.A.NO. 2321-2322 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995

(for impleadment and directions and office report)

20. Since the mining lease has already come to an end, nothing further survives in these applications which are accordingly dismissed.

I.A.NO. 2348-2349 IN W.P.(C) NO.202/1995

(for impleadment and directions and office report)

21. By this application, the prayer made is for a direction to the Government of Goa to clo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top