The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of an Environmental Clearance Certificate for mining activities, the availability of an appeal process in case of lease cancellation, and the court's emphasis on environmental compliance and sustainable development.

S.C. SHARMA, J.

1. The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 18-2-2015 passed by the Collector, Dewas in respect of Survey No. 836 area 10.926 hectare. By the aforesaid order, the Collector Dewas has recommended the matter to the Director Geology and Mining, Bhopal for cancellation of the lease, in exercise of powers conferred under the Madhya Pradesh Minor Mineral Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred as 'the Rules of 1996'). The petitioner's contention is that a show cause notice was issued on 26-2-2014 directing the petitioner to show cause as to why the mining lease executed in his favour be (sic: not) cancelled or a fine be imposed upon him. The petitioner did submit a reply Anenxure-P-2 to the Collector (Mining) Dewas and thereafter the Collector (Mining) Dewas based upon the documents relating to the case has forwarded the matter by an order dated 18-2-2015 to the Director Geology and Mining, Bhopal.

2. The petitioner's contention is that certain grounds which were not reflected in the show cause notice have been made to be the basis by the Collector while recommending cancellation of the lease. It is also been argued that as per Rules of 1996, sixty days time should have been granted to cure the defect and the Collector without granting sixty days time has recommended the cancellation of lease. It is pertinent to note that the notice was issued to the petitioner on 26-2-2014 and the recommendation has been made by the Collector on 18-2-2015.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court towards the various report submitted by the various department and his contention is that the various department involved in the matter have not given any negative remark in respect of the petitioner's lease and, therefore, the order passed by the Collector is bad in law and by no stretch of imagination the Collector should have passed the impugned order.

4. The order passed by the Collector also reflects that the petitioner does not have any Environmental Clearance Certificate as required under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 read with section 25 and 26 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and a specific query was raised to the learned counsel while he was arguing the matter that whether the petitioner does have a certificate in respect of Environmental Clearance Certificate, he has categorically stated that the petitioner does not have such a certificate and the petitioner has applied for the same, long back.

5. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate has argued before this Court that the Collector has recommended the matter to the Director Geology and Mining, Bhopal for cancellation of the lease on account of order passed by the National Green Tribunal, Central Zone Bench at Bhopal. He has further stated that the National Green Tribunal, Bench at Bhopal by order dated 23-9-2014 has also permitted the lease holders/owners of crushing units, who are parties before the Tribunal to submit their reply.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The matter is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of the parties.

7. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner who does not have an Environmental Clearance Certificate is carrying out mining activities, since 2010, which is really shocking. If the law requires for Environmental Clearance Certificate, the officers posted at Bhopal owes an explanation to this Court as well as to the Public at large as to how the petitioner was continuing with mining activities in absence of the Environmental Clearance Certificate.

8. The petitioner was issued a proper show cause notice by the Collector on 26-2-2014 and the petitioner did submit a reply in the matter. The learned Collector in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 30(26) has recommended the matter to the Director Geology and Mining, Bhopa