Regulatory enforcement of environmental conditions is critical in mining operations to prevent degradation and ensure compliance.

JUDGMENT

Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member

1. The application is filed by the applicants challenging the continued mining operations by the 1^st and 2^nd respondents in P.V. Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh.

2. The applicants are residents and farmers from P.V. Puram Village, who are being directly affected by the mining operations carried out by the private respondents. According to them, the mining activities have been conducted in blatant violation of the conditions stipulated in the environmental clearances, consent orders and other statutory permissions granted by the respondent authorities. As the authorities failed to enforce these conditions, it has resulted in environmental degradation, crop loss and adverse health and financial impacts on the applicants and also on the general public.

3. The application is filed on multiple grounds which are as follows:

(i) 1^st and 2^nd respondent have not complied with the mandatory conditions prescribed under the Environmental Clearances, Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate leading to widespread environmental damage and loss to farmers.

(ii) The Company had not developed 05m green belt, outer boundary, in the 50m buffer zone around the mining lease area and the crusher unit. The failure to develop the green belt has not been enforced by the authorities.

(iii) There is lack of pollution control measures as the respondents have failed to construct garland drains and siltation ponds to prevent soil erosion and sediment runoff from the mining site, leading to contamination of water resources.

(iv) The project proponent has destroyed the water resources as it has significant damage to irrigation channels located on the southwest, east and south sides of the mining area, depriving local farmers of crucial irrigation facilities.

(v) The existing mud road ought to have been converted into a tar road connecting the mining area to the nearest main road. Additionally, protective screens of 10m height on eastern side of the mining area to protect agricultural lands from dust due to the mining activity was not done. It is alleged that due to the failure to erect protective screens, a 12 years-old girl from the Scheduled Tribe community slipped into an abandoned mining pit and lost life.

(vi) The respondent is also used explosives for blasting, despite the close proximity to the residential area, posing serious risks to human life and property.

(vii) The project proponent had encroached upon Government and private land also unlawfully in Sy. Nos. 141/5, 140/2, 140/6, 140/14 and 140/15.

(viii) There is installation of crusher unit, which is un-approved and the same is without requisite permission from the competent authority.

(ix) Finally, there is unauthorised dumping of wastage outside the quarry lease area which is not permitted and no retention wall has been erected to prevent erosion during rainfall.

4. A Joint Committee was appointed by this Tribunal to find out Whether:

A. The conditions imposed in the Environmental Clearance as well as consent orders were strictly adhere to by the respondents 1 and 2.

B. The pollution control mechanism provided are sufficient to address the issue of pollution, if not what is the mitigating measures.

C. Necessary buffer zone/safety zone, Garland drains were provided.

D. Excess mining has been done, air and water pollution caused by the respondents.

5. The Joint Committee had filed a report dated 12.09.2023. Originally, the 2^nd respondent, Thiru T. Damodara Reddy was granted the quarry lease for road metal and building stone on 22.12.2011 for an extent of 4.569 ha., for a period of 10 years i.e. upto 22.12.2021. Later the lease was transferred on 16.12.2021 by th