Disposed

Moti Singh Shekhawat v. State of Rajasthan

NGT13 Nov 2024IA No. 72/2024 in Original Application No. 131/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal disposed of an application regarding illegal mining in the Aravalli region. The court directed respondent authorities to strictly follow Supreme Court orders prohibiting final permission for mining without court approval until further orders.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to follow Supreme Court guidelines to prevent illegal mining and ensure no violations of environmental rules in the Aravalli region.

Moti Singh Shekhawat vs State of Rajasthan — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No. 5

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (Through Video Conferencing)

¶3

Original Application No.131/2024(CZ) (I.A.No.87/2024)

¶4

Moti Singh Shekhawat Applicant (s)

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Rajasthan & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶7

Date of Hearing: 13.11.2024

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶9

For Applicant (s): None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vaibhav Thakuria, Adv. Mr. Lokendra Singh Kacchaw, Adv. Mr.Shoeb Hasan Khan, Adv.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The grievance in this letter petition is illegal mining in Khasra no. 80 which falls under the Arawali region in village Ballupura Gram Panchayat Khora in Dantaramgrah Tehsil Sikar District of Rajasthan. It is further stated that the mining within the area of Arawali Hills has been totally prohibited by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and inspite of the fact that mining is prohibited some influential persons are regularly busy and continuing the mining operation in violation of environmental rules in blatant violation of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

¶12

Notices were issued to the respondents and in the meantime various I.As have been filed by the interveners with the facts that Hon’ble the Supreme Court has taken cognizance of the matter. The intervener

¶13

¶14

O. A. No.131/2024(CZ) Moti Singh Shekhawat vs. State of Rajasthan& Ors

¶15

has filed the copy of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dated 09.05.2024 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4677/1985 titled as M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors . where Hon’ble the Supreme

¶16

Court of India has directed as follows :

¶17

“ 7. We, therefore, direct that a Committee be constituted comprising of the following officers/officials to have a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges:-

¶18

i. Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India.

¶19

ii. Secretaries of the Department of Forests, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and the States of Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat.

¶20

iii. A representative of the Forest Survey of India.

¶21

iv. A representative of the Central Empowered Committee.

¶22

v. A representative of the Geological Survey of India.

¶23

vi. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India, shall be the convenor of the Committee.

¶24

8. The said Committee shall submit its report within a period of two months from today.

¶25

9. In the meantime, we also issue the following directions, as suggested by Shri P. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae, to which Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India appearing for the State of Haryana and Shri K.M. Natraj, learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the State of Rajasthan, do not have any objection:-

¶26

i. Direct the Union of India through the MoEFCC, State of Rajasthan, State of Haryana and GNCTD to file affidavits with details comments on the CEC Report No.3/2024 and also the issues identified hereinabove.

¶27

ii. The States of Haryana and Rajasthan should specifically indicate what steps for compliance of 15 (fifteen) Judgments/Orders of this Court’s have been taken by the respective States.

¶28

iii. The States of Haryana and Rajasthan should specifically state what action has been taken on the CAG/CEC Reports on illegal mining and whether prosecution under the relevant State Laws and Recovery Process has been undertaken.

¶29

¶30

O. A. No.131/2024(CZ) Moti Singh Shekhawat vs. State of Rajasthan& Ors

¶31

iv. The State of Rajasthan to specifically state the actions taken pursuant to the FSI Report dated 22.02.2018 where illegal mining polygons have been identified.

¶32

v. The State of Rajasthan be directed to reply to the FSI Report submitted to this Court pursuant to Order dated 19.02.2010. The FSI Report dated 25.08.2010 and the CEC Report thereon dated 25.10.2010 were shared with the State of Rajasthan way back in 2010.

¶33

vi. The States of Rajasthan and Haryana shall also state the extent and mapping of all boundaries of mining areas (mentioned in the mining leases) within the area of the State.

¶34

10. Shri K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae, has further submitted that until further orders are passed by this Court, no fresh mining leases or renewal of existing mining leases should be permitted in Aravalli Ranges and Hills in the States of Haryana and Rajasthan.

¶35

11. The said suggestion is opposed by Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India and Shri K.M. Natraj, learned Additional Solicitor General of India and Shri A.N.S. Nadkarni, learned senior counsel appearing for the Federation of Associations of Mining in Rajasthan. It is submitted that millions of labourers are dependent upon the mining activities carried out in these States. It is submitted that if the order, as sought by the learned Amicus Curiae is passed, it would have a cascading effect on the livelihood of millions of labourers.

¶36

12. According to our experience and as has been pointed out by this Court, in the judgment of this Court dated 10.11.2021 passed in C.A. No.3661-3662/2020, a total ban on mining is not conducive even to the interest of the environment, inasmuch as it gives scope for illegal mining.

¶37

13. In that view of the matter, to balance the competing interest, we find that the following direction would subserve the purpose:-

¶38

Until further orders, though all the States in which Aravalli Ranges and Hills are situated would be at liberty to consider and process the applications for grant of mining leases and also for renewal thereof including obtaining statutory clearances from the various authorities, no final permission shall be granted for mining in the Aravalli Hills/Ranges, as defined in the FSI Report dated 25.08.2010,without permission from this Court.

¶39

¶40

O. A. No.131/2024(CZ) Moti Singh Shekhawat vs. State of Rajasthan& Ors

¶41

14. Needless to state that this order in no way shall be construed as prohibiting the legal mining activities which are being carried out in accordance with the valid permits/licences.

¶42

The contention of the interveners are that the mining leases are in operation with the permission from the concerned department as quoted in the para 14 of the above quoted order.

¶43

Since the matter is pending before Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India and vide order dated 09.05.2024 necessary orders have been issued with regard to Arawali hills/ranges, thus respondents/State Authorities are directed to strictly follow the guidelines and directions issued by Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India quoted above and to ensure that there should not be any violations or illegal mining in violation of environmental rules. Further action shall be taken in accordance with the decision taken by Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India.

¶44

With these observations the O.A. No. 131 of 2024 (CZ) with all I.As stands disposed of.

¶45

Sheo Kumar Singh, JM

¶46

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶47

13^th November 2024 O. A. No.131/2024(CZ) K

¶48

Moti Singh Shekhawat vs. State of Rajasthan& Ors

¶49

¶50

O. A. No.131/2024(CZ)

Moti Singh Shekhawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moti Singh Shekhawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sevasetu vs the State Environment Impact Assessment

Sevasetu vs the State Environment Impact Assessment

Dr Subhash C Pandey vs Bhopal Municipal Corporation

Dr Subhash C Pandey vs Bhopal Municipal Corporation

Haripriya Patel vs State of Odisha

Suo Motu Fissh Kill at Lingambudhi Lake in Mysuru vs Central Pollution Control Board Rep. by Its Chairman

Sri Arun Kumar Dutta vs the State of West Bengal

D5 and D8 Residents Welfare Association Model Town New Delhi vs Horticulture Department of Municipal Corporation Delhi New Delhi

Dr Subhash C Pandey vs Bhopal Municipal Corporation

Dr Subhash C Pandey vs Bhopal Municipal Corporation

News Report Published in the Newspaper Named "Indian Express Daily News Paper Dated 4 February 2022 Kolkata Late City Edition Which Is About the Non Compliance of Ec Conditions by Kulda Coal Mine Odisha & Tamnar Thermal Plant Chattisgarh" vs Tamnar Power Plant

Moti Singh Shekhawat vs State of Rajasthan

Moti Singh Shekhawat vs State of Rajasthan