Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 1570

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL BHOPAL (CENTRAL ZONE BENCH)
Sheo Kumar Singh, Judicial Member, Afroz Ahmad, Expert Member
Dr. Brijmohan Sapoot Kala Sanskriti Sewa Sansthan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Original Application No. 194/2024(CZ) | I.A. No. 88/2024 | I.A. No. 89/2024 | I.A. No. 90/2024 | I.A. No. 91/2024 | I.A. No. 92/2024 | I.A. No. 93/2024 | I.A. No. 94/2024 | I.A. No. 95/2024 | I.A. No. 98/2024

Advocates:
For the Applicant(s): Mr. Arvind Nayyar, Sr. Adv., Mr. R.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv. (with Mr. Aman Jha, Adv.), Mr. Pratap Thakur, Adv., Mr. Rishi Tutu, Adv.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Sr. Adv. (Mr. Shoeb Hasan Khan, Adv., Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Adv. and Mr. Samresh Katare, Adv.), Mr. Arvind Verma, Sr. Adv., Mr. R.B. Mathur, Sr. Adv. (with Achint Kumar, Adv.), Mr. Om Shankar Shrivastava, Adv., Mr. Sachin K. Verma, Adv. (with Ms. Harshita Tejwani, Adv.), Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv., Mr. Ravikant Patidar, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Singh Patidar, Adv., Mr. Prateek Singh Baghel, Adv.

DSR approval with public consultation mandatory before sand mining auctions; compliant e-auctions upheld if plots from approved DSR via committees; Tribunal bars contractual claims like bid forfeiture.

Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines, 2016 and Enforcement & Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020 - District Survey Report (DSR) preparation and approval - E-auction of minor mineral bajri plots - DSRs approved by SEIAA subject to compliance with court directions and guidelines before auction - Plots delineated post-DSR approval by sub-divisional committees after site visits - No violation found where DSR includes potential mining areas, public consultation done, and clusters formed for EC categorization without 500m gaps - High Court upheld DSR validity and rejected stay on auctions - E-auction proceedings not vitiated by alleged non-inclusion of specific plots in DSR or cluster violations where compliant with guidelines and prior judicial scrutiny. (Paras 4, 5, 33-39, 59)

(B) National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Jurisdiction - Contractual matters like bid forfeiture, blacklisting for non-deposit of amounts post-e-auction, and debarment not maintainable as intervenor applications - Environmental issues only; prior High Court adjudication on same facts bars re-agitation - Directions issued for strict compliance with SSMG-2016, EMGSM-2020 including DSR, EC limits, replenishment studies, monitoring mechanisms pan-India. (Paras 54-55, 60-61)

Facts of the case:
Applicant challenged e-auction notices for 46 bajri plots in two districts alleging DSR deficiencies like absence of proposed leases/clusters, no public consultation, violation of 500m gap and cluster rules under guidelines, referencing Supreme Court orders. Respondents defended DSR approval by SEIAA, sub-divisional committee recommendations, public domain placement. Intervenors, successful bidders who failed to deposit 40% premium, sought restraint on proceedings, refund, challenging blacklisting. High Court rejected similar challenges upholding DSR and vacating stays.

Findings of Court:
DSR preparation and auctions compliant with guidelines; no procedural violations; High Court orders binding; intervenor I.As. on contractual grievances not maintainable before Tribunal.

Issues: Validity of DSR sans proposed leases/public hearing; cluster formation and 500m spacing in auctions; compliance with SSMG-2016/EMGSM-2020; maintainability of intervenor claims post-participation; impact of prior High Court/Supreme Court rulings.

Ratio Decidendi: DSR must detail potential areas post-public consultation with SEIAA approval before auctions; plots auctioned only from approved DSR via committees; EC per cluster limits; prior judicial validation precludes re-litigation; Tribunal confines to environmental compliance, not contracts.

Result: Original Application and all I.As. disposed directing guideline compliance, periodic inspections, monitoring; e-auctions upheld per High Court/Supreme Court orders.

Table of Content
1. procedural hearing and filings noted. (Para 1 , 2)
2. applicant's challenge to e-auctions lacking dsr compliance. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. intervenors' participation and subsequent objections to process. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. high court rejection of similar dsr challenges. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. supreme court directives on cec compliance for sand mining. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
6. desilting permissions and supply inadequacy arguments. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
7. dsr preparation and eia notification requirements. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
8. tribunal precedents on dsr prerequisites. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
9. state compliance with dsr approval and cluster delineation. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38)
10. intervenors' locus and blacklisting for non-compliance. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49)
11. dismissal of intervenors' i.as. as contractual matters. (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54)
12. directions for guideline compliance; oa disposed per court orders. (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61)

ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

2. The respondent has filed the reply and applicant has filed the rejoinder to the reply filed by Respondent no. 1 and Respondent no. 2. I.A. No. 88/2024 to 95/2024 and 98/2024 have been filed by the intervenors and reply to the I.A. has been filed.

3. The contentions of the applicant are that the Respondent No. 2 has issued total number of 09 E-Auction Notices (Annexure-2) for Minor Mineral Bajri putting 114 number of plots for various Districts of Rajasthan, wherein 14 Plots of Tonk District and 32 Plots of Bhilwara District have been put for E-Auction in so far as District Bhilwara and Tonk is concerned. The Tehsil-wise breakup pertaining to Plots for Minor Mineral Bajri put far E- Auction in respect of Bhilwara and Tonk District is furnished as under:

District	Tehsil	Bajri Plots put for auction	Remarks
Tonk	Deoli	07
	Tonk	07
Bhilwara	Sawalpur	09
	Mandalgarh	08
	Hurda Vijay Nagar	07
	Hamirgarh	07
	Baguda	01

4. The Respondent No. 2 has prepared DSR for District Tonk and Bhilwara, which have been approved by the SEIAA (Respondent No. 4) vide letter No. F.1(4)/SEIAA/SEAC/DSR/2023-24 dated 21.09.2023 in respect of District Tonk and vide letter No. F.1(4)/SEIAA/SEAC/DSR/2023-24/2568 dated 29.01.2024 in respect of District Bhilwara. The DSRs have been approved by SEIAA with condition that "Mining Department will ensure compliance of all the directions of the Hon’ble Courts and Guidelines of Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines, 2016 and Enforcement & Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020 (EMGSM-2020) before the Auction/E-Auction/grant of Mining Lease/Letter of Intent". Thus, the DSRs have been approved subject to compliance of aforesaid condition. That both the DSRs are not containing any proposed leases for Auction. Further, both the DSRs are not containing any proposed Cluster Mining Leases or Contiguous Cluster Mining Leases. As per EMGSM, 2020, it is mandatory for incorporation of proposed Mining Leases in the DSRs after public consultation and the final list of Sand Mining Areas proposed for Leases are required to be defined in the final DSR after the public hearing.

5. That the Respondent No. 2 has put on Auction total 46 of Bajri Plots for Auction in respect of District Bhilwara and Tonk and the said Plots have been distributed among various Auctions to mislead that these are separate Plots without forming any Cluster or contiguous cluster. However, if the total Plots for both the Districts put for Auction are analyzed, it would appear that the Respondents have put on Auction cluster of Bay’ Leases in violation of the limit prescribed under EMGSM, 2020. By putting the 46 Bajri (River Sand) Plots for Auction in District Bhilwara and Tonk without having any distance and gap of 500 meters and it is in violation of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed in State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Pawan Kumar & Ors. (2022) 2SCC 348.

6. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 1570

DSR approval with public consultation mandatory before sand mining auctions; compliant e-auctions upheld if plots from approved DSR via committees; Tribunal bars contractual claims like bid forfeiture.

Cases Referred (3)