Disposed

Bhupen Killing v. the Union of India and Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Jun 2025WP(C)/3326/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition seeking quashing of mining suspension order allowed only in part by granting liberty to file a review petition before the competent authority, following precedent in a similar matter. Writ petition disposed of subject to review process.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file a review petition against the impugned suspension order dated 29.01.2025 within one week.

Bhupen Killing Vs the Union of India and Ors. — Environment and Pollution | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010128752025

2025:GAU-AS:7743

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/3326/2025

¶6

BHUPEN KILLING

¶7

S/O RAM SING KILLING R/O HARMATI KILLING GAON PO KAT TERON PS RONGMONGVE DISTY KARBI ANGONG ASSAM PIN 782482

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE (MOEFF) INDIRA PARIYAVARAN BHAWAN, JORBAGH ROAD, NEW DELHI-110003

¶10

2:THE NATIOAL BOARD OF WILDLIFE

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MEMBER STANDING COMMITTEE OF NATIONAL BOARD OF WILDLIFE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE (MOEFF)

¶12

INDIRA PARIYAVARAN BHAWAN JORBAGH ROAD NEW DELHI-110003.

¶13

3:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶14

REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY-781006

¶15

4:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶16

TO THE STATE OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DISPUR GHY-781006.

¶17

5:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINING DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM.

¶18

6:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE

¶19

H BLOCK 2ND FLOOR JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GHY-781006.

¶20

Page No.# 2/5

¶21

7:THE DIRECTOR OF GEOLOGY AND MINING GOVT OF ASSAM DAKHINGAON GUWAHATI ASSAM. KAHILIPARA

¶22

8:THE STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21.

¶23

9:POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21.

¶24

10:THE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DIPHU KARBIANGLONG

¶25

11:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG

¶26

12:THE ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU

¶27

13:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER KARBI ANGLONG EAST DIVISION DIPHU

¶28

14:THE RANGE OFFICER NORTH WESTERN RANGE PARKUP PAHAR KARBI ANGLONG.

¶29

15:THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL

¶30

DIPHU. FOREST

¶31

16:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF KARBI ANGLONG EAST DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSA

¶32

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA, SR. ADV, MR. R S MISHRA,MR. R K MAHANTA

¶33

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, PCB,SC, FOREST,GA, ASSAM

¶34

Page No.# 3/5

¶35

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶36

ORDER

¶37

Date : 13-06-2025

¶38

Heard Mr. RS Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J Chutia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 10 to 15; Mr. SR Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5, 7 & 16; Mr. RR Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 & 6 as well as Ms. A Sarma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. B Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

¶39

2. The petitioner has prayed for setting aside and quashing the suspension order dated 29.01.2025 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Karbi Anglong, East Division, Diphu and to direct the respondent authorities to restore the mining operation of the petitioner at Nopani Sarthe Killing Gaon P.P. Land.

¶40

3. The learned counsels for the parties submit that in a similar matter, this Court vide order dated 03.04.2025 had allowed the petitioner in WP(C) 1003/2025 to file a review against the communication issued by the DFO, suspending all mining operation in the Eco Sensitive Zone of Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve and within default esz of KNP & Tr, in compliance with the Supreme Court’s order. They submit that the petitioner in WP(C) 1003/2025 submitted a review petition pursuant to the order dated 03.04.2025, which had been subsequently allowed by the concerned authority. The petitioner therein was allowed to do the mining operation after obtaining necessary clearance.

¶41

4. In the order dated 03.04.2025 passed in WP(C) 1003/2025, the learned

¶42

Page No.# 4/5

¶43

Standing Counsel, KAAC had submitted that there was a provision under the Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2013, particularly, Rule 67 which provides for a review by the Director/Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Head of Forest Force, Assam. As the matter was a transferred subject to the KAAC, the authority would be the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council.

¶44

5. Pursuant to the Review petition in WP(C) 1003/2025 being allowed, this Court vide order dated 05.05.2025 disposed of WP(C) 1003/2025, by holding that the KAAC was to issue the revocation of the suspension order issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Karbi Anglong East Division, Diphu, within 1 (one) week and to permit the petitioner therein to continue with the mining operation.

¶45

6. Mr. J. Chutia, learned counsel for the KAAC submits that if a review is to be filed by the petitioner, the authorities would have to look into the fact that the petitioner’s environmental clearance dated 13.06.2024 had been valid for a period of 2 years w.e.f. 13.06.2024, in terms of Clause 8 of the General Conditions of the letter dated 13.06.2024 issued by the Member Secretary, SEIAA, Assam. As the environmental clearance had expired on 13.06.2024, the petitioner would have to apply for a fresh environmental clearance. He also submits that the land in question where the mining operations are being held is owned by KAAC.

¶46

7. The counsels for the parties submit that all the issues raised by the parties herein can be looked into by the authority taking a decision on the review petition that may be allowed to be filed to the petitioner.

¶47

8. In view of the above reasons, the petitioner herein is also given the liberty

¶48

Page No.# 5/5

¶49

to file a review petition within a week from today before the concerned authority against the impugned order dated 29.01.2025, as has been allowed in WP(C) 1003/2025. The concerned authority shall thereafter take a decision on the petitioner’s review petition, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The entire exercise should be concluded, within a further period of 3 (three) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the review petition.

¶50

9. If the review is allowed by the concerned respondent, the petitioner should be permitted to continue with his mining operation.

¶51

10. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶52

JUDGE

¶53

Comparing Assistant

Bhupen Killing v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupen Killing v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Naduar Koibarta Mach Mara S. S. Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Hifzur Rahman Mazar Bhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Jogeswar Bora and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

M/S Geramari Gaon Panchayat Meen Samabay Samity Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

M/S Century Merchantile Pvt. Ltd. and 17 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

M/S Utpala Traders Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.