Sunil Ambwani, J.

1. By this writ petition filed in public interest for protection of environment, the petitioner, a public spirited person and permanent resident of District Barmer, residing in the City of Jodhpur for last 12 years, engaged in the occupation of Journalist with the degrees of MA (Journalism) and LL.B., practicing as an Advocate, with several studies and articles concerning environment and sustainable development, has prayed for directions to declare the Rules 37-P to 37-U inserted vide the Notification dated 19.6.2012, under the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986, as illegal, without jurisdiction and ultra vires the Notification issued by the Central Government under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986. The petitioner has also prayed for declaring all the actions taken in pursuance to the amended Rules vide Notification dated 19.6.2012 as well as advertisements dated 26.10.2012, 16.11.2012 and 30.11.2012 and the approval of Environment Management Plans (EMPs) by the respondents-authorities, after formation of cluster of mines, to be illegal and to quash the same. He has also prayed for declaring the renewals of quarry licenses merely on the approval of EMPs, to be illegal and to quash the same.

2. The petitioner has also prayed for directions to the State Government to frame Rules while strictly complying with the requirement of Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification dated 14.9.2006 issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests and the directions given by this Court in D.B.Writ (PIL) Petition No.10304/2010 Dinesh Bothra V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 19.8.2011, against which Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and the directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27.2.2011 in Deepak Kumar etc. V/s State of Haryana and ors. etc. (IA Nos.12-13 of 2011 in Special Leave petition (C) No.19628-19629 of 2009) and for further directions, which this Court may deem fit, in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) vide Notification dated 14th September, 2006 issued under sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 and sub-section (1) and clause (v) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Environment (protection) Act, 1986, in supersession of its earlier Notification dated 27th January, 1994, except in respect of things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, directed that on and from the date of its publication the required construction of new projects or activities or the expansion or modernization of existing projects or activities listed in the Schedule to the Notification, entailing capacity addition with change in process and or technology, shall be undertaken in any part of India, only after the prior environmental clearance from the Central Government or as the case may be, by the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SLEIAA) constituted by the Central Government under sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, in accordance with the procedure specified in the Notification.

4. The clause-4 of the Notification dated 14th September, 2006 categorized the projects and activities in Category-A and Category-B, based on the spatial extent of potential impacts on human health and natural and man made resources. Whereas the projects and activities included in Category-A of the Schedule, including expansion and modernization of existing projects or activities and change in product mix, shall require prior environmental clearance from the Central Government in the MoEF, on the recommendations of an Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) constituted by the Central government, all projects or activities included in Category-B of the Schedule, including expansion and modernization of existing projects or activities as specified in subparagraph (ii) of paragraph 2, or change in product mix as specified in su