Back
2026 Supreme(HP) 364
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
G.S. Sandhawalia, C.J., Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.
Raj Sharma- Petitioner
Versus
The State of HP and others - Respondents
CWPIL No. 02 of 2025
Decided On : 27-02-2026
For the Petitioner:Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rishi Tandon, Advocate
PIL dismissed for lack of illegality in post-flood dredging auction following due process, with petitioner's locus vitiated by extortion FIR indicating personal interest.
Headnote:(A) Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - Himachal Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) and Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2015 - Public Interest Litigation alleging unscientific illegal mining using heavy machinery beyond permissible depths in river bed and hill slopes, causing environmental degradation, flash floods, revenue loss, and threats to public safety near pipelines - Mining suspended interim on site inspection report showing depths up to 30 meters - Stay vacated upon verification of original records confirming proper auction process for post-flash flood dredging of quantified usable minerals (55% of total), awarded to highest bidder above reserve price with deposits made - Dredging permitted to specified depths (5-15 meters) per expert methodology to widen channel, control erosion, and prevent future floods - No mining zone declared around pipelines - PIL dismissed as no illegality found and petitioner's locus undermined by extortion FIR against him prior to filing. (Paras 13, 24-30, 36-41)
(B) Public Interest Litigation - Locus standi - Where petitioner faces criminal investigation for extortion against leaseholders using forged documents, personal interest vitiates PIL maintainability - Court refrains from merits adjudication pending trial. (Paras 21, 34, 37)
Facts of the case:
Public Interest Litigation filed highlighting illegal mining activities resulting in environmental damage, health hazards, flash floods, and revenue evasion through unscientific excavation beyond limits using heavy machinery, absence of check posts, and operations near high-risk seismic zone and border. Representations ignored; Enforcement actions noted against some lessees. Site inspection revealed excessive depths; interim suspension ordered amid rains. Respondents justified regulated leases, permissions for machinery, check posts, and post-flood dredging auction per expert reports to mitigate flood risks by removing sediments and widening channel. Private respondents alleged petitioner's extortion demands leading to FIR.
Findings of Court:
Auction proceedings followed due process with expert quantification, government approval, wide publicity, and highest bid accepted; dredging time-bound (12 months) essential pre-monsoon to avert future floods; expert suggestions for slope maintenance, creeks as check barriers for erosion control, groundwater recharge implemented; no interference warranted.
Issues: Whether alleged illegal unscientific mining warranted continued judicial intervention; validity of post-flood dredging auction and depths; petitioner's locus amid extortion FIR; permissibility of dredging during non-monsoon.
Ratio Decidendi: No apparent illegality in dredging auction per rules where expert reports justify quantum and methodology post-flash flood triggered by heavy rains narrowing channel; petitioner's conduct (extortion FIR) shows personal interest barring PIL; appellate scrutiny limited to perversity, not substitution of views.
Result: Public Interest Litigation dismissed; pending applications disposed; interim stay vacated.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. illegal unscientific mining causes floods, damage. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. interim mining suspension ordered. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 3. state denies illegality, cites regulations. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. inspection confirms excessive excavation depths. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 5. dredging auctioned for flood mitigation. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 33) |
| 6. petitioner's extortion fir questions motives. (Para 31 , 32 , 34 , 35) |
| 7. proper procedure; pil dismissed. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 8. pil dismissed, records returned. (Para 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.
The present Public Interest Litigation has been filed as pro bono publico, by the petitioner highlighting the issue of mining activities being carried out in the Humm-Khad region of Bathu Batheri area of District Una H.P, resulting into various consequences and damages to the environment as well as the health.
2. The petitioner is stated to be an environmental activist, who has been writing to the authorities for stopping the illegal mining and always works in public interest. It is submitted that in case this Court comes to the conclusion to dismiss the Public Interest petition with cost, in that eventuality, the petitioner would be ready to bear the cost.
3. The petitioner is stated to have made various representations to the competent authorities regarding stopping of the illegal Mining in the Humm Khad situated in District Una in Sub-Division Haroli but no action there upon has been taken and illegal Mining is continuously being carried out by the lease holders of that area under the eyes of the Mining authorities as well as other Government Machinery.
4. It is further pleaded that the unwarranted excavation and rampant illegal mining in unscientific way is being done in the Sub Division Haroli, District Una (H.P) by way of using heavy machinery such as JCB, Poclain, which is disturbing the earth's ecosystem leading to lose soil, reducing water level, flash floods, mud flow and deaths in the said region. It is further submitted that 19 mining leases have been granted in a small area falling in the Sub Division Haroli, District Una (H.P) which are adjacent to the Himachal Punjab Border. This region comes under EQ Zone-IV which is a high damage risk zone (Red Zone) and known as silent feature area as per the Geological report and mining activities in these regions which lead to flash floods, mud flow, landslides and earthquakes. It is further submitted that there are many leases where there is no public road and the activities of mining are being carried out through a privately managed machinery which is not permissible as per law as there would be no control of the authorities as there is no departmental Check Post and unaccounted material would be transported by the lessee which is going to happen in the present case. One of the mining lease holders namely, M/S Lakhwinder Stone Crusher, is stated to be having 3 Mining leases in the Sub Division Haroli, District Una (H.P) and is the biggest illegal mining operator in the said region. The said lease holder is carrying out illegal mining activities in an unscientific way and by using heavy machineries such as JCB, Poclain etc., which is completely impermissible. Hundreds of trucks and tippers are being loaded and transported every day from these mining lease areas. The petitioner has appended copy of satellite photos as well as photographs (Annexure P-1-Colly), which shows that Heavy Machineries are being used for the illegal Mining and that the deep mining in river bed and illegal mining beyond the prescribed limit has been done in the Hill slope. There is no permission to the lessee of the area to do the mining with heavy machinery, still the unscientific mining is being carried out by the mining Mafias.
5. It is further averred that the Enforcement Directorate (E.D) has registered an F.I.R against some Stone Crusher owners, wherein owners have been found to
