Compliance with environmental regulations is essential in mining, and effective monitoring is the Tribunal's responsibility to safeguard ecological balance.

ORDER

1. Grievance of the applicants is regarding illegal sand mining at Khasra no. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 37 and 38 in village Pachayarha Khand1, District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh by contractor Mr. Mumtaz Ali up to the depth of 15-20 feet in river bed of River Yamuna in violation of environmental norms.

2. Vide order dated 10.03.2022, this Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee comprising of Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPPCB), and District Magistrate-Ghaziabad (Uttar Pradesh) and directed the same to submit factual and action taken report within three months.

3. In compliance thereof, the Joint Committee inspected the area on 04.04.2022 in the presence of applicant-Om Pal and submitted report vide email dated 25.05.2022.

4. Vide order dated 12.07.2022, the Joint Committee was directed to look into the aspects mentioned therein and submit further Factual and Action Taken Report within two months.

5. Pursuant thereto, the Joint Committee inspected the area on 03.11.2022 and has submitted report vide email dated 11.11.2022.

6. Vide order dated 16.11.2022, notices were ordered to be issued to the State of Uttar Pradesh through the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh; the Director, Directorate of Mining and Geology, Uttar Pradesh; UPPCB; the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad and the Project Proponent-Mr. Mumtaz Ali S/o Mr. Fakir Mohammad, resident of Mohammadabad, District Jyotiba Phule Nagar, Uttar Pradesh and the project proponent was restrained from carrying out any further mining from the mining site in question till further orders to the contrary.

7. The project proponent filed Civil Appeal No. 8872/2022 titled Mumtaz Ali Vs. Ompal and Others. before Honble Supreme Court and the following interim order was passed by Honble Supreme Court:-

The proceedings before the National Green Tribunal are re-listed on 08.12.2022. Learned Counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the reports, which, he states, are in his favour. He submits that given these facts, the direction passed that the appellant should stop mining would cause immense prejudice to the appellant. Conditions can be imposed to ensure mining in accordance with rules, as the reports indicate that the appellant has been complying with the rules.

8. The project proponent has filed I.A. No. 319/2022 for passing an order in compliance of the interim order dated 02.12.2022 of Honble Supreme Court and allowing the project proponent to continue the mining in accordance with rules.

9. It is evident from the interim order passed by Honble Supreme Court that conditions can be imposed to ensure mining in accordance with rules. The project proponent has represented before Honble Supreme Court that the project proponent had been complying with the rules as reported by the Joint Committee constituted by the Tribunal. However, it is pertinent to observe that the Joint Committee and even UPPCB did not undertake comprehensive assessment and monitoring with regard to the compliance by the project proponent with the conditions imposed by the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Uttar Pradesh (SEIAA) at the time of granting Environmental Clearance (EC) to the said project proponent, more particularly, conditions no. 15, 16, 19, 33, 34 and 46 which read as under:-

15. Primary survey of flora and fauna shall be carried out and data shall be submitted to the RO, PCB and SEIAA within six months.

16. Hydro-geological study shall be carried out by a reputed organization/institute within six months and establish that mining in the said area will not adversely affect the ground water regime. The report shall be submitted to