M/S Mittal Minerals Vs Union of India

¶1

1 / 4

¶2

2024:CGHC:47194

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 5809 of 2024

¶6

M/s Mittal Minerals, Through Its Proprietor, Shri Anil Agrawal S/o Shri Rameshwar Agrawal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 10/7, Nehru Nagar (East), Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. Union Of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Environment Forest And Climate Change (MoEF And CC), Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi.

¶10

2. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through the Sceretary, Department Of Geology And Mining Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

3. The Director Mining, Directorate Of Geology And Mining Indravati Bhawan, Block-4, First And Second Floor, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

4. The Collector Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

5. The Mining Officer Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

6. The Chhattisgarh State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Through Its Chairman Pryavas Bhawan, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

7. The State Level Expert Appraisal Committee-3 (SEAC-3), Through Its Member Secretary Pryavas Bhawan, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

*(Cause title taken from*	*Case Information System)*
For Petitioner	: Mr. Vikram Sharma, Advocate.
For Union of India/Respondent No.1 For State/Respondents No.2 to 5	: Ms. Annpurna Tiwari, Advocate. : Mr. Praveen Das, Deputy A.G.
For Respondents No.6 & 7.	: Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, counsel appear
	on behalf of Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate.

¶18

2 / 4

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board

¶20

02/12/2024

¶21

1. Today, this case is listed for orders on default(s).

¶22

2. Default(s), as pointed out by the Registry, is waived.

¶23

3. With the consent of counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally.

¶24

4. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the

¶25

Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:-

¶26

“ 10.1. That, this Hon’ble Court kindly be please to issue an appropriate writ/directions/orders directing the respondent no.6 to carry out the re-appraisal of the mining lease allotted through lease at Khasra No.429 Rakba 1.97 Hectare at Village Patora, Tehsil Patan, District Durg, the case of which has been already forwarded by the District Collector and is pending with the respondent No.6, in accordance with law within stipulated time frame as stated in the Office memorandum dated 14.10.2024.

¶27

10.2. That, this Hon’ble Court kindly be please to issue an appropriate writ/directions/orders directing the respondent no.7 to assist the respondent no.6 for carrying out the reappraisal of the mining lease allotted through lease at Khasra No.429 Rakba 1.97 Hectare at Village Patora, Tehsil Patan, District Durg, the case of which has been already forwarded by the District Collector and is pending with the respondent No.6, so that the same can be done within stipulated time frame as stated in the office memorandum dated 14.10.2024.

¶28

10.3. That, in alternative, this Hon’ble Court kindly be please to issue an appropriate writ/directions/orders directing the respondent no.6 to permit the petitioner to carrying out the mining lease allotted through Khasra No.429 Rakba 1.97 Hectare at Village Patora, Tehsil Patan, District Durg the case of which has been already forwarded by the District Collector till the re-appraisal is not done by the respondent No.6 as the re-appraisal is the duty of the ‘CG-SEIAA’.

¶29

10.4 Any other relief with this Hon’ble Court may deem fit.

¶30

3 / 4

¶31

10.5 Cost of the filing of the petition may given to the petitioner.”

¶32

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, earlier, time for completion period of re-appraisal issued by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority was till 07.11.2024. Before completion of aforesaid period, petitioner filed various applications for re-appraisal of the environment clearance by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, but the same have not been considered by respondent authorities, however, he would submit that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal Nos.3799-3800/2019 (Union of India vs. Rajiv Suri) vide order dated 12.11.2024, has extended the period of re-appraisal till 31.3.2025, therefore, counsel for the petitioner submitted that this petition may be disposed of directing respondents No.6 & 7 to decide his application for re-appraisal in accordance with aforesaid order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶33

6. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.6 & 7 would submit that they are already in process for re-appraisal of the environment clearance. He would further submit that, since Hon’ble Supreme Court has already extended the date of re-appraisal till 31.3.2025, therefore, this petition has become infructuous.

¶34

7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 to 5 extended their support to the contention made by counsel for the respondents No.6 & 7.

¶35

8. Since vide order dated 12.11.2024, Hon’ble Supreme Court has already extended the date of re-appraisal till 31.3.2025, therefore, without commenting anything in merit of the instant case, this petition is

¶36

4 / 4

¶37

disposed of, however, respondents No.6 & 7 shall act in accordance

¶38

with order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶39

9. With aforesaid observations and directions, the instant petition stands

¶40

disposed of.

¶41

Sd/-