9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 954 - SC - Indian LawsWrit Petition - Complete ban on mining - large scale illegal mining at the cost and to the detriment of the environment - encroachment into forest areas by leaseholders and ongoing mining operations without requisite statutory approval - Central Empowered Committee ( the CEC ) was asked to submit a report on the allegations of illegal mining in the Bellary region of the State of Karnataka - two lessees have sought upgradation from C to B Category - restricted six mining leases granted in favour of M/s. Bellary Iron Ore Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Mahabaleswarapa Sons M/s. Ananthapur Mining Corporation and M/s. Obulapuram Mining Company Pvt. Ltd. - HELD THAT - We accept the findings of the survey conducted by the Joint Team constituted by the orders of this Court and the boundaries of each of the leases determined on that basis. We further direct that in supersession of all orders either of the authorities of the State or Courts as may be the boundaries of leases fixed by the Joint Team will henceforth be the boundaries of each of the leases who will have the benefit of the lease area as determined by the Joint Team. All proceedings pending in any court with regard to boundaries of the leases involved in the present proceeding shall stand adjudicated by means of present order and no such question would be open for re-examination by any body or authority. Whether categorization on the basis of percentage of the encroached area qua the total lease area is an arbitrary decision - Arbitrariness in the adoption of a criteria for classification has to be tested on the anvil of Article 14 and not on the subjective notions of availability of a better basis of classification. The basis suggested i.e. total encroached area has the potential of raising questions similar to the ones now raised on behalf of the lease holders. The only caveat in this regard is in respect of category C mines. The Federation had suggested that the said mines be also allowed to reopen subject to similar or even more stringent conditions and alternatively for reopening of 39 total out of the total of 49 category C mines by adoption of certain more liberal criteria than those recommended by the CEC. In the totality of the circumstances we are of the view that the categorization suggested by the CEC in its Report dated 3.2.2012 should be accepted by us. There is nothing in the preconditions or in the details of the R R plans suggested which are contrary to or in conflict or inconsistent with any of the statutory provisions of the MMDR Act EP Act and FC Act. In such a situation while accepting the preconditions subject to which the Category A and B mines are to be reopened and the R R plans that must be put in place for Category B mines we are of the view that the suggestions made by the CEC for reopening of Category A and B mines as well as the details of the R R plans should be accepted by us which we accordingly do. This will bring us to the most vital issue of the case i.e. the future of the Category C mines. Illegal mining apart from playing havoc on the national economy had in fact cast an ominous cloud on the credibility of the system of governance by laws in force. It has had a chilling and crippling effect on ecology and environment. It is evident from the compilation submitted to the Court by the CEC that several of the Category C mines were operating without requisite clearances under FC Act or even in the absence of a mining lease for a part of the area used for mining operations. The satellite imageries placed before the Court with regard to environmental damage and destruction has shocked judicial conscience. It is in the light of the above facts and circumstances that the future course of action in respect of the maximum violators/polluters i.e. Category C mines has to be judged. While doing so the Court also has to keep in mind the requirement of Iron Ore to ensure adequate supply of manufactured steel and other allied products. Once the result of the survey undertaken and the boundaries of the leases determined by the Joint Team has been accepted by the Court and the basis of categorization of the mines has been found to be rational and constitutionally permissible it will be difficult for this Court to visualize as to how the Category C mines can be allowed to reopen. There is no room for compassion; fervent pleas for clemency cannot have even a persuasive value. As against the individual interest of the Category C lease holders public interest at large would require the Court to lean in favour of demonstrating the efficacy and effectiveness of the long arm of the law. We therefore order for the complete closure of the Category C mines and for necessary follow up action in terms of the recommendations of the CEC in this regard details of which have already been extracted in an earlier part of this order. In so far as settlement of the inter-state boundaries between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka is concerned both the States have agreed to have the boundaries fixed under the supervision of the Geological Survey of India. In view of the agreement between the States on the said issue we permit the States to finalize the issue in the above terms. The operation of the 7 leases (Category B1) located on or near the inter-State boundary is presently suspended. Until the boundary issue between the two States is resolved resumption of mining operations in the 7 leases cannot be allowed. The CEC has provisionally categorised M/s. S.B. Minerals and Shanthalakshmi Jayaram in Category B though the encroached area under illegal mining pits has been found to be 24.44% and 23.62% respectively. According to the CEC it is on account of the complexities involved in finalizing the survey sketches and in the absence of inter-village boundary that the said leases have been placed in Category B instead of Category C . We cannot agree with the tentative decision of the CEC. On the basis of the findings of the survey and the categorization made both of which have been accepted by the Court by the present order we direct that the aforesaid two leases namely M/s. S.B. Minerals and M/s. Shanthalakshmi Jayaram be placed in Category C . Necessary consequential action will naturally follow. The CEC in its Report dated 28.3.2012 has placed the cases of M/s. V.S. Lad Sons and M/s. Hothur Traders (placed in Category C ) for final determination by the Court. The CEC has reported that the encroachment by M/s. V.S. Lad Sons is only in respect of the overburden dumps and exceeds the percentage (15%) marginally i.e. by 0.17% which could very well be due to the least count error used by the Joint Team. In so far as M/s. Hothur Traders is concerned the CEC in its Report dated 28.3.2012 has recorded that according to the lessee it has carried on its mining operation for the last 50 years in the lease area allotted to it which may have been wrongly identified in the earlier surveys and demarcations by taking into account a wrong reference point. In the result we summarize our conclusions in the matter as follows (1) The findings of the survey conducted by the Joint Team constituted by this Court by order dated 6.5.2011 and boundaries of the leases in question as determined on the basis of the said survey is hereby approved and accepted. (2) The categorization of the mines ( A B and C ) on the basis of the parameters adopted by the CEC as indicated in its Report dated 3.2.2012 is approved and accepted. (3) The order of the Court dated 13.4.2012 accepting the recommendations dated 13.3.2012 of the CEC (in modification of the recommendations of the CEC dated 3.2.2012) in respect of the items (A) to (I) is reiterated. Specifically the earmarked role of the Monitoring Committee in the said order dated 13.4.2012 is also reiterated. (4) The order of the Court dated 3.9.2012 in respect of reopening of 18 Category A mines subject to the conditions mentioned in the said order is reiterated. (5) The order of the Court dated 28.9.2012 in all respects is reiterated. (6) The recommendations of the CEC contained in the Report dated 15.2.2013 for reopening of remaining Category A mines and Category B mines (63 in number) and sale of sub-grade iron ore subject to the conditions mentioned in the said Report are approved. (7) The recommendations contained in paragraphs VI and VII (Pg. 56 to 57) of the CEC Report dated 3.2.2012 are accepted meaning thereby the leases in respect of C Category mines will stand cancelled and the recommendations of the CEC (para VII Pg. 56) of Report dated 3.2.2012 with regard to the grant of fresh leases are accepted. (8) The proceeds of the sales of the Iron Ore of the C Category mines made through the Monitoring Committee will stand forfeited to the State. The Monitoring Committee will remit the amounts held by it on this account to the SPV for utilization in connection with the purposes for which it had been constituted. (9) M/s. V.S. Lad Sons M/s. Hothur Traders M/s. S.B. Minerals (ML No. 2515) and M/s. Shanthalakshmi Jayaram (ML No. 2553) will be treated as C Category mines and resultant consequences in respect of the said leases will follow. (10) The operation of the 7 leases placed in B category situated on or nearby the Karnataka-Andhra Pradesh inter-State boundary will remain suspended until finalisation of the inter-State boundary dispute whereupon the question of commencement of operations in respect of the aforesaid 7 leases will be examined afresh by the CEC. (11) The recommendations made in the paragraph VIII of the Report of the CEC dated 3.2.2012 (pertaining to M/s. MML Pg. 57) is accepted. The recommendations made in paragraphs IX X XII (in respect of confiscated iron-ore) XIII and XIV of the said Report dated 3.2.2012 (Pg. 57-60) will not require any specific direction as the same have already been dealt with or the same have otherwise become redundant as may be. (12) The recommendations made in paragraph XI (grant of fresh leases) and paragraph XII (in respect of pending applications for grant of mining leases) of the CEC s Report dated 3.2.2012 (Pg. 59) are not accepted. In view of the discussions and conclusions in para 44 of the present order this Court s order dated 02.11.2012 placing an embargo on grant of fresh mining leases need not be continued any further. Grant of fresh mining leases and consideration of pending applications be dealt with in accordance with law the directions contained in the present order as well as the spirit thereof. (13) Determination of the inter-State boundary between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh in so far as the same is relevant to the present proceedings as agreed upon by the two States be made through the intervention of the office of Surveyor General of India. We also direct that all consequential action in terms of the present order be completed with the utmost expedition. The writ application filed by Samaj Parivartan Samudaya and IAs shall stand disposed of in terms of our above stated conclusions.
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in dealing with allegations of systematic plunder of natural resources. 2. Over-exploitation and indiscriminate mining in Karnataka, particularly in Bellary district. 3. Effectiveness of the measures taken by the State Government and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) reports. 4. Categorization of mining leases based on the extent of illegal mining. 5. Implementation of Reclamation and Rehabilitation (R&R) Plans. 6. Conditions for reopening of Category 'A' and 'B' mines. 7. Closure of Category 'C' mines. 8. Future course of action for Category 'C' mines. 9. Miscellaneous issues including inter-state boundary disputes and grant of fresh mining leases. Detailed Analysis: 1. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court examined its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution to address allegations of systematic plunder of natural resources due to illegal mining in Karnataka. The Court emphasized its power to issue directions or orders necessary for enforcing fundamental rights, especially in cases of mass environmental degradation. The Court noted that its jurisdiction is not limited by procedural technicalities and can adopt any procedure necessary to secure the enforcement of fundamental rights. 2. Over-exploitation and Indiscriminate Mining: The Court acknowledged the extensive illegal mining activities in Karnataka, particularly in Bellary district, which led to significant environmental degradation and loss of revenue. The Court referred to various reports, including those by the Lokayukta and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), highlighting the rampant illegal mining activities and the State Government's failure to take corrective measures. 3. Effectiveness of Measures Taken: The Court reviewed the measures taken by the State Government and the reports submitted by the CEC. It noted that despite various committees and reports, illegal mining continued unabated. The Court emphasized the need for stringent measures to curb illegal mining and protect the environment. 4. Categorization of Mining Leases: The CEC recommended categorizing mining leases into three categories based on the extent of illegal mining: - Category 'A': Leases with no or marginal illegality. - Category 'B': Leases with illegal mining up to 10% of the lease area. - Category 'C': Leases with illegal mining exceeding 10% of the lease area. The Court accepted this categorization, finding it rational and constitutionally permissible. 5. Implementation of Reclamation and Rehabilitation (R&R) Plans: The Court approved the CEC's recommendations for implementing R&R Plans for all mining leases. These plans aim to ensure scientific and sustainable mining, environmental protection, and compliance with statutory requirements. The Court emphasized the importance of these plans for the long-term sustainability of mining operations. 6. Conditions for Reopening of Category 'A' and 'B' Mines: The Court accepted the CEC's recommendations for reopening Category 'A' and 'B' mines subject to specific conditions, including compliance with statutory requirements, implementation of R&R Plans, and payment of compensation for illegal mining. The Court emphasized that these conditions are necessary to ensure responsible mining practices. 7. Closure of Category 'C' Mines: The Court ordered the complete closure of Category 'C' mines due to their extensive illegal mining activities and environmental damage. The Court found no room for leniency and emphasized the need to demonstrate the effectiveness of the law. 8. Future Course of Action for Category 'C' Mines: The Court directed that the leases of Category 'C' mines be canceled and fresh leases be granted through a transparent bidding process. The proceeds from the sale of iron ore from these mines were to be forfeited to the State and used for environmental and socio-economic development. 9. Miscellaneous Issues: - Inter-state Boundary Disputes: The Court directed the States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh to finalize their boundary disputes under the supervision of the Geological Survey of India. - Grant of Fresh Mining Leases: The Court lifted the embargo on the grant of fresh mining leases, directing that such grants be made in accordance with the law and the spirit of the Court's order. Conclusion: The Supreme Court's judgment addressed the extensive illegal mining activities in Karnataka, emphasizing the need for stringent measures to protect the environment and ensure responsible mining practices. The Court accepted the CEC's recommendations for categorizing mining leases, implementing R&R Plans, and reopening mines subject to specific conditions. The Court also ordered the closure of Category 'C' mines and directed the grant of fresh leases through a transparent process. The judgment highlights the Court's commitment to enforcing fundamental rights and protecting the environment.
|
