Item No.19.1 (Pune Bench)

ORDER

1. In compliance with our previous order dated 08.04.2026, learned counsel for Respondent No.1- SEIAA, Gujarat has filed further report by way of an affidavit dated 20.06.2026, in which it is submitted that at the time of hearing, the appellant made submission that no public road passes through or even within a distance of 200 meters of the mining lease area. Later on, the appellant filed an additional affidavit dated 23.03.2026, placing on record the proceeding certificates issued by the Roads and Building Department of the Panchayat as well as Certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat declaring that quarry area is located at a distance of about 325 meters from a public road. The governmental and public authorities have clarified that the road appearing in the satellite images as passing from the mining area is not a public road but only an access road made by the appellant for entering and exiting the mining area and is different from the Balpur Khuntadiya road (M.D. Road) which is a public road.

2. It is further mentioned in the above affidavit by Respondent No.1 that the certificates, which have been issued by governmental authority, namely the Executive Engineer of the Roads & Building Department of the Panchayat Division of the District and the statutory body, namely the Village Gram Panchayat, are genuine. The regulatory authority does not have jurisdiction to review its decision. Therefore, it is submitted that the documents now submitted by the appellant were not available before it at the time of re-appraisal of the Environmental Clearance granted by the DEIAA. The decision was taken by the regulatory authority on the basis of available material at the relevant point of time.

3. It is further mentioned in the above affidavit by Respondent No.1 that upon consideration of the subsequent certificates issued by government officials and statutory body declaring that the road passing through the mining area is not a public road and that the nearest public road is at a distance of more than 200 meters from the mining area, this Tribunal may prima fade conclude that the decision of SEIAA was based on incomplete facts and that the same needs to be reviewed in light of the said certificates and then appropriate directions may be issued.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the Certificate dated 21.01.2026 issued by the office of the Executive Engineer, Panchayat (R&B) Division Tapi-Vyara, Panwadi, Ta. Vyara, Dist. Tapi in favour of the appellant, which is annexed at page no.251 of the paper book, in which it is recorded that the road leading from the Primary School in Bamnamalnjhik village towards Urja Stone Quarry is under private ownership. It is this Certificate, which has been placed before the SEIAA, Gujarat now, based on which it is being said that this Tribunal may pass appropriate order.

5. It is also urged by learned counsel for the appellant that a similar Certificate was also issued by the Office of the Executive Engineer, Panchayat (R&B) Division Tapi-Vyara on 26.12.2024, which is annexed at page no.253 of the paper book, wherein the same facts have been mentioned, which have been recorded in the Certificate dated 21.01.2026.

6. When we enquired from learned counsel for the appellant as to why the above Certificate dated 26.12.2024 was not placed by the appellant before the SEIAA, Gujarat at the time of consideration of the matter, to which he has pointed out to para no.10 of the pleadings of the main