ORDER

1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide judgment in Deepak Kumar Vs State of Haryana & Ors. (2012) 4 SCC 629, directed that leases of minor minerals, including their renewal, even for an area of less than 5 hectares (ha) be granted only after environmental clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (MoEF & CC). This direction was held to be necessary in view of degradation of environment on account of illegal and unrestricted upstream, in- stream and flood plain sand mining activities. Under the existing guidelines, no environmental clearance was required for minor leases of less than 5 hectare area. The result was that there was no regulation of such mining which resulted in environmental degradation. Even bigger cluster was split up in less than 5 ha units to avoid law.

2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that absence of regulation of such mining was not justified as it was threat to bio-diversity, could destroy riverine vegetation, cause erosion, pollute water sources, badly affecting riparian ecology, damaging ecosystem of rivers, safety of bridges, weakening of riverbeds, destruction of natural habitats of organisms living on the riverbeds, affects fish breeding and migration, spell disaster for the conservation bird species, increase saline water in the rivers.

3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that such mining has direct impact on the physical habitat characteristics of the rivers such as bed elevation, substrate composition and stability, in-stream roughness elements, depth, velocity, turbidity, sediment transport, stream discharge and temperature. Increase in demand of sand has placed immense pressure in the supply of sand resource and mining activities were going on illegally as well as legally without requisite restrictions. Lack of proper planning and sand management disturbs marine ecosystem and upset the ability of natural marine processes to replenish the sand.

4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court noted that core group was constituted by the MoEF&CC to examine the impact of minor minerals on riverbeds and ground waters. A draft report was prepared recommending mandatory preparation of mining plan on the pattern of mining plans for major minerals. Further recommendations are reclamation and rehabilitation of abandoned mines, proportion of hydro geological balance for minerals below ground water table limiting depth of mining to 3 meter and identification on locations where mining should be permitted was required. There is need for identifying safety zones in the proximity of intendments. Thus, strict regulatory parameters were required for regulating mining of minor minerals. It was noted that in-stream mining lowers the stream bottom of rivers which may lead to bank erosion. Depletion of sand in the stream bed causes deepening of rivers which may result in destruction of aquatic and riparian habitats. It has impact on stream’s physical habitat characteristics.

5. The grievance before the Tribunal is that the river bed mining was taking place at several locations in violation of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court either without any valid lease or under leases given without following the strict regulatory regime in terms of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court or in violation of lease conditions.

6. In this application the matter pertains to illegal excavation of mineral bajry in the State of Rajasthan and the use of royalty rawannas of private khatedari leases while making excavation from the river bed. That the mining of river sand is primarily being done from the river bed and it is only the transit pass (Rawannas), which are being utilized for the khatedari land. This has led the mining department to make assessment, which clearly spells volumes towards the inspection of such khatedari leases and surprisingly it was found that there is no mineral potential in the aforesaid mining leases. The mineral potential is completely absent in the mining leases despite which they have been r