1. E-auction for sand mining challenged due to absence of a valid District Survey Report (DSR) at the time of notice issuance. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 792
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, MANOJ MISRA, JJ.
State of Uttar Pradesh and Another – Appellants
Versus
Gaurav Kumar and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 14000 of 2024, Civil Appeal No. 14170 of 2024, Civil Appeal No. 14933 of 2024
Decided On : 08-05-2025
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Vishnu Shankar Jain, AOR Mr. Vanshdeep Dalmia, AOR Mr. S.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR Ms. Kavya Roy Choudhury, Adv. Mr. B.N. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohit Gupta, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Ajit Sharma, AOR Mr. Kanchan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Yuvrajsinh C Solanki, Adv. Mr. Lareb Habib Ansari, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR Mr. Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, AOR
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Vishnu Shankar Jain, AOR Mr. Vanshdeep Dalmia, AOR Mr. S.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR Ms. Kavya Roy Choudhury, Adv. Mr. B.N. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohit Gupta, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Ajit Sharma, AOR Mr. Kanchan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Yuvrajsinh C Solanki, Adv. Mr. Lareb Habib Ansari, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR Mr. Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, AOR
A valid District Survey Report is mandatory for environmental clearance in sand mining, and a draft DSR cannot serve as a basis for mining operations.
Headnote:(A) Environment Protection Act, 1986 - EIA Notifications - The court upheld NGT's quashing of the e-auction notice for sand mining, asserting it violated environmental regulations due to lack of a valid District Survey Report (DSR) - A valid DSR is essential for environmental clearance. (Paras 1.2, 20)
(B) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) - Unregulated sand mining disrupts ecosystems and increases flooding risks; robust regulatory frameworks are necessary for environmental governance. (Paras 1.1, 4.4)
Facts of the case:
The e-auction notice dated 13.02.2023 for sand mining was challenged on grounds of legality, as a valid DSR was not in place at that time, leading to NGT's intervention. (Paras 2, 3)
Findings of Court:
The NGT's ruling that the e-auction was illegal was upheld; a valid DSR must precede any auction for mining in accordance with environmental laws. (Paras 20, 21)
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the e-auction in the absence of a valid DSR and compliance with environmental regulations. (Paras 3.2, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: Valid DSR is a prerequisite for granting environmental clearances for mining; drafts are insufficient and the preparation must comply with established legal procedures. (Paras 20, 21)
Result: Civil appeals dismissed; e-auction declared illegal.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Legality of e-auction notice issued when only a draft DSR existed and the previous DSR had expired. (Para 2 )
3. Unregulated sand mining causes severe ecological damage; DSRs are essential for informed decision-making and must be updated every five years to reflect environmental changes. (Para 4 , 20 )
4. A valid and subsisting District Survey Report is a mandatory condition precedent for granting environmental clearance and conducting sand mining auctions; draft reports are untenable. (Para 21 )
5. Civil appeals dismissed; NGT order quashing the e-auction notice upheld. (Para 22 )
6. Is a District Survey Report (DSR) mandatory for sand mining activities?
Yes, a DSR is a document of seminal importance and a mandatory requirement. It forms the basis for environmental clearance applications, the preparation of reports, and the appraisal of projects. (Para 20 , 21 )
7. Can a draft DSR be used as a basis for granting environmental clearance?
No, a draft DSR is untenable and virtually non-existent for the purpose of granting environmental clearance. Only a valid and subsisting DSR can be the basis for such clearance. (Para 21 )
8. What is the validity period of a District Survey Report?
A DSR must be updated once every five years. After this period, the existing report is no longer tenable, and a new DSR must be prepared to reflect current ecological and environmental conditions. (Para 15 , 20 )
9. Which authorities are responsible for the preparation of the DSR?
The District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA) and the District Expert Appraisal Committee (DEAC) are the statutory authorities tasked with preparing the DSR every five years. (Para 12 , 21 )
JUDGMENT :
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.
| Table of Contents | |
| 1. | Affirmation |
| 2. | Facts |
| 3. | Proceedings Before The NGT, Leading To Civil Appeals & Submissions |
| 4. | Sandmining And Its Impact On Environment |
| 5. | Legal Framework |
| 6. | Environment Protection Act, 1986 |
| 7. | EIA Notifications |
| 8. | EIA Notification, 1994 |
| 9. | EIA Notification, 2006 |
| 10. | Deepak Kumar vs. State of Haryana |
| 11. | EIA Notification 2016 |
| 12. | Establishment Of District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA) & District Expert Appraisal Committee (DEAC) Under Para 3A |
| 13. | New Category Called Category B2 For Sandmining In Districts Was Introduced Through Para 4(iv) |
| 14. | Preparation Of District Survey Report Introduced Through Para 7(iii) |
| 15. | Procedure For Preparation Of DSR Introduced Through Appendix X |
| 16. | Challenge To The Notification 2016 The Direction Of NGT In Satendra Pandey’s Case |
| 17. | EIA Notification For Prescribing Procedure For Preparation Of DSR Of Minor Minerals Other Than Sandmining And River Bed Mining |
| 18. | Enforcement And Monitoring Guidelines For Sand Mining, 2020 |
| 19. | Decision Of this Court In State Of Bihar V. Pawan Kumar |
| 20. | Conclusions |
1. Affirmation: We unequivocally uphold the law and the regulations governing sand mining, demanding zero tolerance for unauthorized activities, strict adherence to these regulations is non-negotiable.
1.1. Unregulated sandmining disrupts riverine ecosystems, alters natural flow patterns, and leads to erosion and habitat loss. Aquatic biodiversity suffers as spawning grounds are destroyed and water quality deteriorates. The destabilisation of riverbanks increases flooding, risking human life and animal habitat alike. Moreover, the illicit sand trade often operates under the shadow of organised crime, undermining the rule of law and weakening governance structures. Therefore, absolute standards with get tough policies, strict enforcement and quick accountability are compelling for effective regulatory control.
1.2. We have upheld the decision of National Green Tribunal1 [Hereinafter “NGT”] quashing e-auction notice dated 13.02.2023 issued by the State Government for sand mining and the consequent grant of Letters of Interest (LOIs) in favour of successful bidders on the ground that the auction was conducted in the absence of a valid, final and a subsisting District Survey Report (DSR). We have also held that a Draft DSR is not tenable. A draft DSR can never be the basis for a recommendation by the District Level Expert Appraisal Committee (DEAC) and for the District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA) for B2 category projects pertaining to mining of minor minerals lease area less than or equal to five hectares to grant environment clearance.
2. Facts: District Magistrate, Saharanpur issued notice inviting e-tenders on 13.02.2023 for sand gravel, boulders, etc. available in the riverbed in Saharanpur district under the U.P. Sub Mineral (Remedy) Rules, 2021. Questioning the legality and validity of the e-auction notice, respondent no. 1, a resident of Haryana approached the National Green Tribunal by filing an original application invoking section 14 and 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act contending that the e-auction notice is illegal as there was no District Survey Report (DSR) as on that date. It was his contention that the last DSR for the Saharanpur district of 2017 expired in the year 2022. Thereafter, steps were taken to prepare a DSR for the succeeding 5 years for Saharanpur district, but only a draft DRS was ready by 13.01.2023. However, even before its finalization, the impugned e-auction notice was issued by District Magistrate, Saharanpur on 13.02.2023 which according to the respondent no. 1 is illegal and unsustainable in law.
3. Proceedings before the NGT leading to
