2012 (2) TMI 656 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of auction notices for extraction of minor minerals.
2. Allegations of illegal mining in Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh.
3. Compliance with Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006.
4. Environmental impact of mining activities.
5. Recommendations by Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and Ministry of Mines.

Issue-wise Details:

1. Validity of Auction Notices:
The Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Haryana issued auction notices on 3.6.2011 and 8.8.2011 for the extraction of minor minerals in various districts. The validity of these auction notices is under challenge due to concerns over environmental degradation and the breaking of homogeneous areas into pieces of less than 5 hectares to circumvent EIA requirements.

2. Allegations of Illegal Mining:
The Supreme Court directed the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to inspect alleged illegal mining in Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Haryana. The CEC's report, submitted on 4.1.2012, failed to address the serious illegal and unrestricted mining activities and their environmental impact.

3. Compliance with EIA Notification, 2006:
The court examined whether the auction notices violated the EIA Notification dated 14.9.2006 by breaking homogeneous areas into smaller plots to avoid environmental clearance. The MoEF's affidavit emphasized that mining areas should not be fragmented to circumvent the EIA Notification.

4. Environmental Impact of Mining Activities:
The court expressed deep concern over the environmental degradation caused by sand mining, particularly in river beds. The adverse effects include erosion, pollution, destruction of habitats, and threats to biodiversity. The necessity of a proper environmental assessment plan was highlighted.

5. Recommendations by MoEF and Ministry of Mines:
The MoEF's report of March 2010 and the Model Rules, 2010, issued by the Ministry of Mines, recommended strict regulatory measures for mining minor minerals. Key recommendations included:
- Minimum size of mine lease should be 5 hectares.
- Minimum lease period should be 5 years.
- Cluster approach for small mines.
- Mandatory mine plans for minor minerals.
- Creation of a separate corpus for reclamation and rehabilitation.
- Hydro-geological reports for mining below the groundwater table.
- Specific guidelines for river bed mining.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court directed all States, Union Territories, MoEF, and the Ministry of Mines to implement the recommendations within six months and submit compliance reports. It ordered that leases of minor minerals, including renewals for areas less than five hectares, be granted only after obtaining environmental clearance from MoEF. The court emphasized the need for a comprehensive mining plan to address environmental concerns and ensure sustainable mining practices.