IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. - 2024-01-10

O R D E R

I.A. Nos. 157777 and 157782 of 202 3

1. As requested by Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additiona l Solicitor General, four weeks’ time is granted to file repl y affidavit .

2. List these applications on 14.02.2024 .

IA Nos. 37666, 37670 and 37679 of 202 0

1. The affidavit filed by the State of Rajasthan does no t take into consideration as to what is the effect of the Repor t of the Kapoor Committee .

2. The State shall, therefore, clarify as to whether th e Kapoor Committee, which was appointed after the order to tha t effect were passed by this Court, has identified the pieces o f land in question to be included in forest or not .

3. It is also pointed out by the applicant(s) that in th e Master Plan of Banswara Municipal Council of 2011-2031, th e land in question has been designated as residential zone .

4. As requested by Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned senio r counsel appearing for the State, four weeks’ time is grante d to file an affidavit .

5. List these applications on 14.02.2024 .

I.A. Nos. 2874 and 2876, 2877 and 2879 of 201 0

1. The report of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) i n all these applications shows that mining lease of th e applicant(s) does not fall in the Aravali Hills and furthe r that no illegal mining was found. Though the report of th e Forest Survey of India endorses that no illegal mining ha s been found in this area, it suggests that the said areas fall s within the Aravali Hill Range .

2. Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned senior counsel appearing fo r the State of Rajasthan submits that the issue as to whethe r the classification between Aravali Hills and Aravali Ranges , in so far as the mining activities are concerned needs to b e finally decided by this Court .

3. We, prima facie, feel that if the State is of the vie w that the mining activities in the Aravali Range is als o deterimental to the environmental interest, nothing stops th e State Government from preventing mining activities in th e Aravalli Range as well .

4. Be that as it may, the application of the presen t applicant(s) stand on a similar footing which were allowed b y this Court vide order dated 16th January, 2023 .

5. We, therefore, dispose of these application(s) wit h direction to the State Government to consider th e application(s) filed by the applicant(s) for permitting th e renewal and continuance of the mining operations in accordanc e with law .

6. In so far as mining activities in Aravali Hills an d Ranges are concerned, Mr. K. Parameshwaran, learned Amicu s Curiae states that it will be in the larger public interest , if all these issues are examined by the CEC and a comprehensive direction is issued by this Court in tha t regard .

7. We find the suggestion of the learned Amicus Curia e reasonable .

8. We request the CEC to examine the issue as to whether th e classification of Aravali Hills and Ranges in so far a s permitting mining is concerned, needs to be continued or not .

9. We also request the CEC to take on board the experts i n Geology before finalizing its report. The same shall be don e within a period of eight weeks from today .

10. List on 13.03.2024 for the said purpose .

11. We are informed that though the issues involved wit h regard to the mining in Aravali Hills and Rage in Haryana an d Rajasthan are common, the matters/applications with regard t o the mining in State of Haryana are placed before another Benc h of this Court, whereas the matters/applications with regard t o the mining in Rajasthan are placed before this Bench .

12. We are of the view that since the issues with regard t o mining in the Aravali Hills and Ranges are common for both th e States, it will be appropriate that the said matters are hear d and decided by the Same Bench of this Court, so as to avoi d any conflicting order(s) .

13. We, therefore, direct the Registrar (Judicial) to plac e the matter(s) before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India t o obtain appropriate order(s) and place the same before th e Bench as directed by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India .

I.A. Nos. 87544,87550 and 91723 of 2023, 107906 and 107909 o f

2023, 112525, 112526 and 112527 of 202 3

1. We request the CEC to examine the issue involved in thes e applications and submits its report within eight weeks fro m today .

2. List these applications on 13.03.202 4 I.A. Nos. 115479, 115480 and 115482 of 202 3

1. The relief which is sought in these application(s) ha s already granted by the State by cancelling the lease .

2. Accordingly, these applications have become infructuou s and the same are disposed of .

2. We are informed that since the cancellation has bee n challenged by the lease holder, the matter is sub judic e before the High Court. The High Court shall decide the sam e on its own merits .

I.A. No. 108146 of 2022 in W.P.(C) No. 202 of 1995 and W.P .

(C) No. 633 of 202 2

1. Vide judgment and orders dated 26th April, 2023 and 28t h April, 2023, we have prohibited all mining activities withi n one kilometer from the boundaries of the National Parks/Wil d Life Sanctuaries .

2. Indisputably, since the areas in respect of which th e relief is sought in the present applications fall within on e kilometer of the aforesaid boundaries, no separate orders ar e required to be passed in these matters .

3. This application and Writ Petition are accordingl y disposed of .

4. We further clarify that in the event, the State find tha t any illegal mining activity conducted by any of the miners , the State would always be at liberty to proceed in accordanc e with law and disposal of this application/petition would no t come in the way of those proceedings .

I.A. Nos. 90862 and 90864 of 202 1 In view of the report of the CEC and specifically th e reasons mentioned in paragraph 13 thereof, the application s are rejected .

I.A. Nos. 79569 and 79576 of 2019 with I.A. No. 159670 an d 159677 of 2019, I.A. Diary Nos. 14261 and 14262 of 2021, I.A .

Nos. 40599 and 40624 of 2023 and I.A. No. 220675 of 202 3

1. Vide our earlier order dated 24th February, 2023 and 12t h July, 2023, we had issued certain directions with regard t o laying of paver blocks on the roads as well as plying of E - rickshaws in the city of Matheran .

2. Mr. Siddarth Dharmadhikari, learned Standing Counsel fo r the State of Maharashtra submits that the Monitoring Committe e in consultation with IIT Bombay, is considering the proposa l of using clay paver blocks instead concrete paver blocks .

3. It is submitted that it is necessary to use clay pave r blocks in order to prevent the soil erosion .

3. We clarify that E-Rickshaws, if permitted, would be onl y provided to the present hand cart pullers in order t o compensate them on account of their loss of employment .

4. We further clarify that there shall also be a restrictio n on the number of E-rickshaws to be permitted in the city o f Matheran .

5. Alongwith the issue of paver blocks, if any, th e Monitoring Committee shall also consider as to which of th e roads/streets would be permitted to be used by the E - rickshaws. Further, determine the number of e-rickshaws to b e plied in the city of Matheran .

6. The Monitoring Committee shall submit the report wit h regard to that within four weeks from today and thereafter tw o weeks’ time is granted to the applicant(s) to file response , if any .

7. List these applications/matters on 13.03.2024 .

IA Nos. 2079/2007, IA Nos. 2301-02/2008, IA Nos. 3044 - 3045/2011, IA Nos. 111725 and 154041/2018 in IA Nos. 2771 - 72/2009 and W.P. (C) No. 301/2008 .

1. As prayed, two weeks’ time is granted to the learne d counsel for the State to file reply affidavit and thereafte r two weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for th e applicant(s) to file response .

2. List these applications/matter(s) on 14.02.2024 .

IA Nos. 1408, 1457 and 1462 of 2005, IA Nos. 1787, 1863-186 4 of 2007, 3453 of 2012, 178808 and 192984 of 202 3

1. In view of letter circulated by learned counsel for th e petitioner seeking adjournment on the ground of persona l difficulty, hearing of these applications is deferred for fou r weeks .

2. List these applications on 14.02.202 4 IA No. 41723 of 202 2

1. As prayed, four weeks’ time is granted to the learne d counsel for the State to take instructions as to what step s are being taken for identification, survey and demarcation o f the sacred groves such as Orans, Dev-Vans and Rundhs etc., a s forest lands .

2. We make it clear that if no positive response is receive d from the State on the next date of hearing, we will b e compelled to take such steps as may be found necessary .

3. List this application on 14.02.2024 . I.A. Nos. 43616, 43618 and 43621 of 202 0

1. Mr. Ranjith Marar, learned counsel appearing for th e respondent No.10 against whom the allegations have been mad e by the applicant(s) as well as by the State seeks and i s granted two weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. Thereafter , two weeks’ time is granted to the opposite party to fil e rejoinder affidavit, if any .

2. List these applications on 14.02.2024 .

IA Nos. 2930/2010, IA No. 3963/2017, 160714/2019, 77320/202 3 and 79064/202 3

1. As prayed, four weeks’ time is granted to the learne d counsel for the State to file reply affidavit .

2. List these applications on 14.02.2024 .

I.A. No. 19010, 75982, 86706, 90640, 122128 and 122130 , 129260 and 129264/2019, 129279/2019, 150901 and 150915 of 201 9 1. As prayed, two weeks’ time is granted to file repl y affidavit and thereafter two weeks’ time is granted to th e applicant(s) to file rejoinder affidavit, if any .

2. List these applications on 14.02.2024 .

IA Nos. 85124 and 85332 of 202 3 As prayed by Mr. Nalin Kohli, learned counsel appearin g for the State, list these applications on 14.02.2024 .

IA. Nos. 12465 and 98194 of 2019, IA Nos. 127871 and 127874 o f

202 0 As requested by Mr. Sidharth Dharmadhikari, learne d counsel appearing for the State, list these matters o n

14.02.2024 .

IA No. 5965 of 2024 in I.A. No. 47252 of 202 1

1. The applicant has approached this Court praying fo r permission to continue its mining operation in the Diamon d Mining Project at Village Majhgawan Mine, District Panna , Madhya Pradesh in terms of the Mine Closure Plan dated 23r d September, 2019 .

2. The application has been filed by the present applican t since the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) has observed tha t the project proponent needs to seek clarification from thi s Court regarding the applicability of orders dated 26th Apri l

2023 and 28th April 2023 .

3. This court on 30th November, 2022 had passed the followin g

Order :

“IA No. 47252, 47249 and 47644 of 202 1 The applications (I.A. Nos.47249 and 47644 o f

2021) for impleadment and exemption from filing O.T . are allowed. The main application (I.A. No. 47252 o f 2021) is for permitting the applicant to continu e its mining operations in 16 the Diamond Minin g Project at village Majhgawan in District Panna , Madhya Pradesh, in terms of the Mine Closure Pla n dated 23.09.2019. The perusal of the applicatio n would reveal that the applicant has already receive d Forest Clearance for Supplementary Mining Lease vid e order dated 06.01.2021, issued by the Secretar y (Forest), Government of Madhya Pradesh. The proposa l for granting Wild Life Clearance has been considere d in the 19th Meeting of M.P. State Wildlife Boar d held on 14.01.2021. The proposal for renewal o f clearance under the Wildlife Protection Act, 197 2 was also considered favourably in the meeting of th e Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife , MoEF&CC, New Delhi on 18.02.2021. The Scientist - D(Wildlife, MoEF&CC, New Delhi vide its letter date d 11.03.2021 communicated the decision of the Standin g Committee to recommend the proposal, subject to th e conditions imposed by the Chief Wildlife Warden an d the NTCA. Taking into consideration the fact tha t all the concerned authorities have already grante d their clearances, we find that the presen t application deserves to be allowed. Another fac t that needs to be taken into consideration, a s submitted by Mr. C.U. Singh, learned senior counse l appearing for the applicant is that after the order s were passed by this Court on 13.08.2008 an d 05.09.2008, there has been an increase in the Tige r population in the Panna Tiger Reserve, which ha d come down to zero. We have also heard the learne d Amicus Curiae. We are, therefore, inclined to allo w the said application, subject to the condition tha t all conditions imposed by the authorities mentione d hereinabove in granting the requisite permissions , as well as the order passed by this Court date d

13.08.2008 shall be strictly complied with .

4. Subsequently, vide an order dated 26th April, 2023, we ha d considered various aspects with regard to the activities to b e permitted in Eco-Sensitive Zone, surrounding the boundaries o f the National Parks, Wild Life Sanctuaries etc. In the sai d order, we had considered all the earlier orders passed by thi s Court right from 2005 with respect to ban on minin g activities. After considering all those order(s), we ha d directed that no mining activities shall be permitted withi n an area of one kilometer from the boundary of the Nationa l Parks/Wild Life Sanctuaries .

5. The application has been filed by the present applican t under the perception that there is a conflict between th e order dated 30th November, 2022 and the order dated 26th Apri l

2023 .

6. This Court though had banned mining activities i n National Parks/Wild Life Sanctuaries and the buffer zones, i t had considered individual application filed by the presen t applicant(s). After considering the special circumstances, th e Court on 13th August 2008 passed the following order :

“These matters relate to the diamond mining project a t Panna (M.P.) The project area is failing within th e Panna National Park/Wildlife Sanctuary. This projec t was examined by CEC and it has approved, subject t o fulfillment of the following conditions :

(i) NPV as per the applicable rate will b e deposited by NMDC for the 74.018 ha. Under ti s possession and 70.202 ha. of forest land used fo r Earthen Dam ;

(ii) 5% of the capital cost incurred on diamon d mining project will be deposited for undertakin g conservation and protection in the Panna National par k & Panna (Gangao) Widlife Sanctuary ;

(iii) A proper Mine Closure Plan, which include s reclamation and rehabilitation measures, will be draw n and implemented at the cost of the NDMC ;

(iv) The notification dated 12.04.2006 issued b y the appropriate authority will be withdrawn ;

(v) A Monitoring Committee under the Chairmanshi p of the Chief Wildlife Warden with the Membe r Secretary, National Tiger Conservation Authority , Field Director, Panna National Park and a non-officia l Member of the National Board for Wildlife (to b e nominated by the MoEF) as its members will b e responsible fo r (a) Approval of the mine closure Plan ;

(b) Prescribing and Monitoring of various safeguard s for operation of the mines ;

(c) Approval and Monitoring of the annual work pla n for utilization of funds received from the NMD C towards the NPV and 5% of the project cost. ”

We nominate Ms. Belinda Wright, as a non-officia l Member in the above said Monitoring Committee .

The above conditions are acceptable to the NMD C and the project is approved subject to fulfillment o f the above conditions. Applications are disposed o f accordingly. ”

7. It could thus be seen that though mining activities wer e prohibited within the area of National Parks/Wild Lif e Sanctuaries, this Court taking into consideration the peculia r facts and circumstances existing in Panna National Park ha d granted a specific permission for continuing minin g activities, however, subject to stringent conditions mentione d therein .

8. This Court also while permitting the application filed b y the present applicant on 30th November, 2022 considered th e order passed by this Court on 13th August, 2008. This Cour t considered that the M.P. State Wildlife Board had also grante d Wild Life Clearances. It was also considered that the Standin g Committee of National Board for Wildlife in its meeting date d 18th February, 2021 had also favourably considered the sai d proposal. This was, however, subject to the condition impose d by the Chief Wildlife Warden and National Tiger Conservatio n Authority .

9. After taking into consideration these aspects and furthe r that the tiger population in the Panna Tiger Reserve ha d substantially increased, we had allowed the application .

10. We, therefore, find no conflict between orders dated 26t h April, 2023 and 28th April, 2023 are applicable Pan India . However, the orders dated 13th August 2008 and 30th November , 2022 are specific to the present project, taking int o consideration the factors which was mentioned in both th e orders .

11. It is further to be noted that as per orders passed b y this Court on 13th August, 2008, the Mine Closure Plan ha s already been prepared and the mining activities will be close d by 2035 in a scientific manner .

12. The project proponent is one of the Navratna Corporation s of the Government of India .

13. If the mining activities are abruptly stopped at thi s stage, the possibility of illegal mining of diamonds bein g carried out, cannot be ruled out .

14. It is rather in the national interest that the Governmen t of India owned company is permitted to continue the activitie s in a scientific manner till the activities are closed .

15. In so far as the interest of environment and wild life i s concerned, the Court has already directed that the activitie s shall be subject to the supervision of the Chief Wildlif e Warden .

16. In that view of the matter, the application is allowed i n terms of the prayer clause (a), which reads as under :

“Clarify that the direction contained in paragraph 6 5 of the order dated 26.05.2023 passed by this Hon’bl e Court in W.P. No. 202 of 1995, will not apply to th e mining operations of the applicant Diamond Minin g Project, which is within the Gagau Wild Life Sanctuary , Panna Tiger Reserve, situated Majhgawan Mine, Distric t Panna at Madhya Pradesh .

I.A. Nos. 263809 and 263810 of 202 3

1. Issue notice, returnable on 14.02.2024 .

2. We request Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicito r General to accept notice on behalf of the Union of India and fil e its response before the next date of hearing .

3. Mr. Karan Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the State o f Punjab accepts and waive notice .

I.A. No. 20650/2023 and 186910 of 2022 in Writ Civil No. 202 o f

1995 and Contempt Petition(C) No. 319 of 202 1

1. Heard-in-part .

2. For further arguments, list the application/matter tomorrow , i.e. 11.01.202 4 (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR )

COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (NSH )