Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 5501
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, Judicial Member, Arun Kumar Verma, Expert Member
Bhumi Adhigrahan Visthapan Avam Punarwas Kisaan Samiti – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Original Application No.137/2023/EZ
For the Applicant(s): Ms. Paushali Banerjee
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree, Mr. Ashok Prasad, Mr. Surendra Kumar
Environmental clearance upheld where site verified outside notified ESZ despite initial false distance certificate, as corrected and confirmed by inspection at 1.8km from sanctuary, beyond 2km ESZ; no wildlife clearance required.
Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - EIA Notification, 2006 - Rule 8(vi) - Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 - Environmental Clearance for sand mining - Allegations of forged forest officer certificate and false distance information from wildlife sanctuary (900m claimed vs. 1.8km verified) leading to grant of clearance without wildlife clearance - Supreme Court orders on eco-sensitive zones (minimum 1km buffer, mining prohibited within 1km of protected areas, wider notified ESZ prevails) - Tribunal rejected preliminary objection on reliance of draft ESZ notification as final notification existed with similar extent - Held: Initial certificate contained false info on no sanctuary within 10km; plot error corrected as typographical; site verified at 1.8km from sanctuary boundary, outside 2km ESZ - No wildlife clearance required per guidelines; clearance valid. Directions to re-examine ESZ applicability. (Paras 32, 40, 43, 51-52)
(B) NGT Procedure - Site inspection by committee - No illegal mining observed; no air/water pollution or wildlife threat; air quality within norms; project inoperative pending consent renewal. Forgery allegation limited to clerical plot correction verified by forest officer. (Paras 49, 52)
Facts of the case:
Application alleging illegal sand mining based on forged documents and proximity to wildlife sanctuary violating ESZ norms. Clearance granted subject to wildlife clearance, but site verified outside ESZ. Committee inspection confirmed no violations, distance 1.8km.
Findings of Court:
Environmental clearance valid; no forgery beyond corrected typographical error; site outside ESZ; no wildlife clearance needed; no pollution or threat observed.
Issues: Validity of environmental clearance obtained via allegedly false forest certificate; proximity to wildlife sanctuary/ESZ; need for wildlife clearance; compliance with Supreme Court ESZ directives.
Ratio Decidendi: Where ESZ notified beyond 1km, wider buffer applies; verified distance beyond ESZ sustains clearance despite initial false info, post correction and inspection confirming compliance.
Result: Original Application disposed; Respondent to re-examine ESZ applicability.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of illegal sand mining with forged documents and missing wildlife clearance (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. tribunal constitutes site inspection committee (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. applicant's claims of forged dfo certificates and prior ngt findings (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. kaimur sanctuary esz notifications and supreme court esz orders (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. respondents' affidavits on consents, corrections, and ec process (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. verification of mining site distance from kaimur esz (1.8 km) (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 7. rejection of maintainability objection based on draft notification (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 8. clarification of plot errors as typographical, ec upheld (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 9. no nbwl clearance needed; compliance with moef guidelines (Para 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 10. joint inspection confirms no violations or threats (Para 49) |
| 11. direction to seiaa for re-examination; oa disposed (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
ORDER
1. Ms. Paushali Banerjee, learned Counsel is present for the Applicant.
2. The Applicant in the present Original Application is alleging that unabated illegal sand mining is going on in Pachadumar Sand Mining Project of M/s Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (‘JSMDCL’ for short), Respondent No.4 herein. It is alleged that the Respondent No.4 has obtained Environmental Clearance on the strength of:-
(i) false Certificate of Divisional Forest Officer, Garhwa North and
(ii) is carrying on sand mining operation illegally without seeking Wildlife Clearance from the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL).
3. It is alleged that the sand mining activities of the Respondent No.4 has caused acute air and water pollution which is also causing an existential threat to the wildlife of Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary of Bihar and adjoining Jharkhand. It is also alleged that the illegal sand mining is situated at a distance of 900 meters from the Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary in gross violation of the various orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court with regard to Eco Sensitive Zone. It is stated that the Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary is situated in the States of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh and adjacent boundary of Jharkhand separated by river Son.
4. It is also stated that the portion of the Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary falling within Uttar Pradesh has got its Eco Sensitive Zone notified as final but the portion of the Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary falling within Bihar has published its draft Notification dated 28.01.2015 and final notification is still pending. It is stated that in furtherance of the sand mining policy and Rules, the Director of Mines, Jharkhand, intimated the Managing Director of Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., Respondent No.4, a provisional list of 177 identified sand Ghats of Category-II spread over 19 districts of the State of Jharkhand for preliminary initiation of lawful process at the end of the Respondent No.4 vide its letter No.2649/M dated 21.11.2017. The Pachadumar Sand Ghat of Garhwa District is mentioned at G. Total No.68 of the aforesaid list.
5. It is stated that State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Jharkhand has granted Environmental Clearance in favour of the Respondent No.4 in its 59th Meeting dated 09.08.2018 at Para I/c. However, Para I/k of the same Minutes notes “Submission of forged documents by M/s JSMDC Ltd. regarding submission of forged documents of Divisional Forest Officer, Garhwa North Division, without his knowledge”.
6. It is also alleged that the Environmental Clearance dated31.08.2018 clearly mentions that the same is subject to obtaining clearance under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, from the competent authority but M/s JSMDC, Respondent No.4, has till date not obtained any clearance from the National Board for Wildlife.
7. It is alleged that the sand mining is being carried on illegally at Plot No.2363(P) at Mouza – Pachadum
