Disposed

Vikram vs

NGT5 Sept 2023Original Application No. 866/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal disposed of an application alleging violation of mining agreements. Finding the mine closed and contract terminated, it directed State PCB and Mining Officer to ensure tree plantation and restoration measures by 31.12.2023.

What did the court decide?

Directed Member Secretary, State PCB and Mining Officer to ensure requisite tree plantation and restoration measures; compliance report to be submitted by 31.12.2023.

Vikram vs — Mining and Natural Resources | NGT (2023)

¶1

Item No. 04

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 866/2022

Vikram

Applicant

Versus

State of Haryana Respondent

¶9

Date of hearing: 05.09.2023

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶11

Respondent: Mr. Rahul Khurana, Advocate for HSPCB

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This original application was registered under Sections 14 and 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 on the basis of letter petition dated 15.07.2022 sent by one Vikram son of Prem Singh alleging that the concerned mining contractor had entered into an agreement for an area of 31 acres and had carried out digging upto 40 feet depth which is not permissible and the mining was to be done in an area of 31 acres but the contractor had exceeded the said area of mining and violated the mining agreement.

¶14

The Tribunal by order dated 11.01.2023 had formed a joint Committee with the following direction:

¶15

“xxx …………………………….xxx……………………………………..xxx 3. In our view, let a factual report be obtained from the concerned authorities. For this purpose we constitute a joint committee of State PCB and District Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar to visit the premises, collect relevant information and submit a factual report including the details of action taken, if any, within two months by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.”

¶16

¶17

The joint Committee had carried out inspection and has submitted the status report dated 19.05.2023 mentioning that during the inspection by the Revenue Department and Mines and Geology Department, the depth of mining was found to be 29 feet and no borewell was found at the mining site. Learned Counsel appearing for the State PCB has pointed out that the mining upto the depth of 29 feet is permissible and there was no violation in this regard.

¶18

The report further reveals that no plantation was done by the mining contractor i.e. M/s. Ganga Yamuna Mining Company – mining of boulder gravel and sand at Village Bhood Majra, Block YNR B 20, District Yamuna Nagar. The report contains details of tree plantation which was required to be done at the project and further discloses that no tree plantation has been done.

¶19

It is clear from the report that on account of non-payment of dues, the mining contract has been terminated by order dated 13.07.2022 and mining operations are closed since 14.07.2022. The order of termination of the contract is subject matter of challenge before the Appellate Authority and the appeal is pending. The relevant extracts from the report of the joint Committee is as under:

¶20

“xxx …………………………….xxx……………………………………..xxx At the time of inspection, there was no clarity about the depth of mining as carried out by the contractor and rainy water was also filled. Therefore, it was decided that Revenue Department and Mines & Geology Department will inspect the site again on 04.03.2023 and will demarcate the depth of mining and will provide the clarity about the mining/illegal mining in the area. Thereafter, the Revenue Department and Mines & Geology Department inspected the site on 04.03.2023 and submitted their report. The said report is enclosed as Annexure-R/1. As per report depth of mining was found up to 29 Feet. No Borewell was found at the mining site.

¶21

It is further submitted that no plantation was observed at the mining site as per the details of project the same are mentioned at serial no.10 in Environmental Clearance and reproduced below:

¶22

¶23

Year of Plantation	Proposed Plantation
I Yr.	400 Trees
II Yr.	400 Trees
III Yr.	400 Trees
IV Yr.	400 Trees
V Yr.	400 Trees

¶24

5. The mining contract has already been terminated by the Director General, Dept of Mines & Geology, Haryana on account of non-payment of dues vide Order dated 13.07.2022 (annexed with Annexure R/1). As such, mining operation is closed since 14.07.2022. The Project Proponent has challenged the termination of contract by way of filing an appeal which is pending before the Additional Chief Secretary to Govt of Haryana, Dept of Mines & Geology.

¶25

6. That present report is being submitted as per official record and inputs received vide respective reports of the concerned officers of the Revenue Department and Mines & Geology Department, Yamuna Nagar.

¶26

This status report is being submitted for kind consideration please. It is undertaken to comply with the directions passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal .”

¶27

Since the mine has already been closed and contract has been terminated, therefore, at this stage, we deem it proper to dispose of the OA with direction to the Member Secretary, State PCB and the Mining Officer to ensure that requisite plantation of trees is done by the mining contractor as per the Mining Plan and EC granted by SEIAA, Haryana and the mining contractor takes the restoration measures in respect of the area which is already reached the stage of reclamation. The Member Secretary, State PCB and the Mining Officer will ensure expeditious action in this regard and a compliance report will be submitted before the Registrar General of the Tribunal by 31.12.2023 by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. In that report, the status of pending appeal will also be disclosed.

¶28

¶29

If found necessary, the matter will be listed before the Bench for consideration after the report is submitted.

¶30

Subject to above, the OA is disposed of.

¶31

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶32

Sudhir Agarwal, JM

¶33

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM September 05, 2023 Original Application No. 866/2022 DV

¶34

Vikram vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram vs

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

Dipak Mahapatra vs West Bengal Mineral Devlopment and Trading Corporation Limited

Joginder Kumar Lamba vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Ajay Gunwani vs Union of India through Ministry of Forest Environment and Climate Change

Virender Kumar Tyagi vs

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra vs Cgwa

V Resalayyan vs Union of India

Ranjeet Kumar vs the Municipal Commissioner

Sabitri Bala Saha vs Municipality

Joginder Kumar Lamba vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Rsa Motors Private Limited Earlier Also Known as Berkeley Realtech Limited vs Seiaa

Rsa Motors Private Limited Earlier Also Known as Berkeley Realtech Limited vs Seiaa

News Item Titled "Fish Kill at Lingambudhi in Mysure" Appearing in the Hindu Dated 29.08.2023 vs

News Item Titled "Eight Killed in Blast at Illegal Fireworks Unit in West Bengal" Appearing in the Hindu Dated 28.08.2023 vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 36/2023 in Original Application No. 823/2022 of Ravinder Singh vs