K.M. Joseph, C.J. (Oral)

The petitions, two in number, i.e. WPPIL Nos. 93 of 2015 and 95 of 2015 being connected, they are disposed of by a common judgment.

2. In WPPIL No. 93 of 2015, the prayers sought are as follows:

“i) Issue a writ, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 16-5-2015 & 19-5-2015 passed by respondent nos. 2 & 8 (contained as Annexure no. 8 to this writ petition).

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding / directing the respondent nos. 2 & 8 to stop all mining activities forthwith at different sites at Haridwar in the Holy River Ganga.

iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding / directing the respondent nos. 3 & 4 to take appropriate actions against respondent nos. 2 & 8 and other responsible persons in accordance with law.

iv) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding / directing the respondent no. 1 to constitute S.I.T. to investigate the matter and to take appropriate legal action against all responsible officers and others.”

3. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner in WPPIL No. 93 of 2015 is as follows:

The District Administration of Haridwar is doing mining activities by joining hands with the mining mafias and the riverbed island were damaged by the illegal mining in river Ganga. There is a reference to the judgment of this Court passed in WPPIL No. 38 of 2012. It is further contended that despite the same, mining activities were being carried out by the Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam and District Administration. A Contempt Petition No. 313 of 2012 was filed and it was found that in absence of E.I.A., mining activities were being carried out by the District Administration despite directions of this Court. There is a reference to the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal. In short, there is a requirement of obtaining environmental clearance of the MoEF/SEIAA and licence from the competent authorities. There is reference to the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Deepak Kumar vs. State of Haryana. There is also reference to the spot inspection of the Expert Committee of respondent no. 1 and the status report, which contained several recommendations. The State Pollution Control Board has also issued directions to respondent nos. 7 & 8 to stop illegal mining at different sites of holy river Ganga at Haridwar. It is stated that despite the same, mining activities in the holy river Ganga are being done by removing island, boulders and by digging the riverbed through heavy machineries, and it is on these allegations that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the reliefs.

4. In WPPIL No. 95 of 2015, the prayer sought is as follows:

“1. A writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to clear the deltas formed in the river GANGA by the collection of river bed material (RBM), adjacent to the villages mentioned in the writ petition.”

5. In short, the case of the petitioner in WPPIL No. 95 of 2015 is that the District Magistrate has taken a decision and issued direction to the Forest and Mining Department on 19th May, 2015 to clear deltas forming in the river adjacent to the villages. It is the case of the petitioner that the villages in question would suffer huge damages, if the deltas are not removed. It is, accordingly, that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the reliefs, which we have mentioned above.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Advocate General. We have also heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India.

7. As far as the complainant in WPPIL No. 93 of 2015 is concerned, it is admitted that after filing of the writ petition, the impugned orders stand withdrawn. In the light of this, essentially, the prayers in the writ petition would appear to become infructuous.

8. The case of the petitioner in WPPIL No. 95