Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raghunandan Singh vs Ministry Of Gen. Administration Dept. on 17 January, 2020
Author: S.C.Sharma
Bench: S.C.Sharma
...1...
HIGH COURT OF M.P. BENCH AT INDORE BENCH
D.B. HON'BLE JUS. SHRI S.C. SHARMA AND HON'BLE
SHRI SHAILENDRA SHUKLA
W.P. No.18163/2019 (PIL)
RAGHUNANDAN SINGH
vs.
STATE OF M.P. & OTHERS
*******
Parties through their counsel.
*******
ORDER
(Indore dt.17.1.2020) PER S.C. SHARMA, J :-
The petitioner before this court who is social worker and who has espoused the cause of environment from time to time has filed this present petition alleging illegal mining near "Reoti range" which is a shooting range of Border Security Force (hereinafter referred as 'BSF').
2. The petitioner's contention is that Reoti range hillock is one of the Green Belt area near the city and it is acting as a barrier between villagers / residents and the shooting range which is under the BSF. The petitioner has raised the issue of illegal mining in respect of area falling under the Green Belt near Indore. Various orders were passed from time to time and documents have been brought on record to establish that the area where, the ...2...
mining is going on is a Green Belt. This Court has directed the Collector, Indore to file a detailed reply. The affidavit filed by the Collector is a very exhaustive affidavit and the same is reproduced as under :-
The present affidavit is being filed in compliance of the order dated 21.10.2019 :-
1. It is submitted that on 30.8.2019 notices were issued to the respondent and the Hon'ble Court has directed that in the meanwhile the District Collector Indore and the Dist. Mining Officer to stop all kind of activities near Revati Range which is subject matter of the present petition.
Further, the Hon'ble Court has directed to file a compliance report within a week by the District Magistrate. On 4.9.2019 a compliance report is filed as per direction of the Hon'ble Court and mentioned that the order has been complied with and all the activities of mining is stopped at Revati Range Tehsil Hatod at Survey No.123/5 Rakba 4.00 Hectare and Survey No.123/5 Rakba No.3.660 Hectare sanctioned in favour of M/s. Ambra Mining Pvt. Ltd. A copy of the compliance report is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure R/1.
Thereafter, on 11.9.2019 the Hon'ble Court has directed to file a reply including the details of land use and the location of firing range and the location of Revati hills. Again on 23.09.2019 another order was passing in the following manner :-
Mr. G.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.Mr. Vinay Gandhi, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State. IA No.4419/2019 is taken up and the same is allowed. Let necessary amendment be incorporated within three days. PF be also paid within three days. Office to issue notice to the newly impleaded respondents. Respondents No.3 and 7 are also represented. Respondent No.3 and 7 are granted time to inform this Court whether ...3...
proper permission was granted by them in the matter of mining which is going on at 'Revty Range'. There is an averment made by the petitioner that mining is going on in other areas also which are earmarked for greenbelt. Counsel for the respondents/State submits that a detailed reply shall be filed positively within a week. He is granted a week's time to do the needful. The Collector/District Magistrate, Indore is directed to ensure that no mining of any kind takes place especially in the hilly areas which are located under the 'Revty Range. The Collector, Indore is directed to file compliance report in respect of mining activities which are going on in Indore - Umariakhurd as well as in respect of other locations/Hills and Mountains.Let copy be handed over to Mr. Milind Phadke, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India (ASG)/Union of India enabling him to seek instructions on behalf of respondent- Border Security Force (BSF)/Union of India. Let complete set of documents be provided to learned Assistant Solicitor General during the course of day. List the matter on 30.09.2019.The interim relief granted earlier shall continue till the next date of hearing.
In compliance of the orders dated 11.9.2019 and 23.9.2019 on 26.9.2019 a detailed reply was filed the answering respondent mentioning inter alia :-
(i) The present public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioner, thereby mainly challenging illegal dig up of mine on the Revty Range Pahadi, which causes grievous harms to environment and fatal for public because the said area is covering shooting range on the basis of newspaper clipping dated 27.8.2019 published in local newspaper.
Further the petitioner has also challenged the action of the answering respondents thereby raising the plea that Revty Range Pahadi is allotted to BSF Border Security Force for carrying out its activities including testing of weapons and as such mining activities at the place in question should be restrained.
It is most humbly and respectfully submitted that the petitioner has not averred in the entire about the source of information other than the ...4...
newspaper cutting. The newspaper cuttings are not considered as the authentic source of information and so the petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
(ii) Further it was also mentioned that it is an admitted position that Revty Range is shooting range of B.S.F. In this regard it is pertinent to mention that in respect of land in question demarcation was done by the Revenue Authorities with the accompany of Members/Representatives of the BSF on 1/10/2016 and, therefore, the mining activities carried out at the place in question are very much within the knowledge of the BSF Authorities and they have requested for demarcation was done on the request of BSF Authorities in the presence of their two officers but after the demarcation no complaint to stop mining was ever raised by the BSF.
(iii) Further it was also mentioned that the averments made by the petitioner with regard to inaction, illegality to stop the digging up of the mine are emphatically denied. It is most respectfully submitted that after following due procedure the lease for mining was granted by the State Repondents and that too after demarcation of the land in question. It is reiterated that in pursuance of the communication date 14.7.2016 of the DIG, BSF, Indore with regard to the mining at Revty Range, a team of members accompanying the Representatives of BSF was constituted by the Tehsildar, Hatod, District Indore for making demarcation of the land and there upon the demarcation was done on 1.10.2016 and the BSF was duly informed about the same thereafter at no point of time any objection in this regard was raised by the BSF Authorities.
(iv) It is most respectfully submitted on behalf of the answering respondents that the respective departments ie., Forest Department, Japad Panchayat, Sanwer as well as MP Pollution Control Board have given their NOCs for carrying out mining activities.
(v) It is most respectfully submitted that land in question where the mining activities are carried out situated at Survey No.123/5 ...5...
admeasuring 4.00 hectare and Survey No.123/5 admeasuring 3.666 Hectare, is a government land recorded in the revenue record and the mining lease has been renewed on 27.8.2017 for the period of 10 years ie., upto 26.8.2027.
(vi) That, as stated in foregoing paras the demarcation of the land in question was done with due concurrence of the BSF authorities, therefore, the aversions made in this regard are totally misplaced. Even the averments made by the petitioner with regard to nearby location of Airport, Aurbindo Medical College, Vaishnav University and Software Companies are of no relevance with the subject matter and by raising such pleas the petitioner is deviating from the subject matter. The averments made by the petitioner that the present public interest litigation is against the respondents who are responsible for the huge financial and revenue loss and harmful for environment and public safety, are vehemently denied.
(vii) It is reiterated that the allotment of mining lease is in consonance with the procedure prescribed and Rules, therefore, the question of illegal mining does not arise and it is not the case to allege that the respondents are sitting silent and closed their eyes, since the mining activities are carried out after following due procedure and procuring respective NOCs from different respective authorities, therefore, the adverse allegations made by the petitioner are denied. It would not be out of place to mention that the petitioner has made aversions against the Forest Authorities and others, but has not impleaded them as party to the petitioner. A copy of the reply dated 26.9.2019 is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure R/2.
Thereafter on 30.9.2019 the matter was again listed wherein the counsel for the State Govt. prayed time to file additional reply / documents. That, in the light of order dated 30.9.2019 on 5.10.2019 additional reply on behalf of respondents was filed satisfying the following details :-
(i) That, on 30.9.2019 this Hon'ble Court has directed to seek instructions as to whether the alleged mining area comes under green belt or not ...6...
and in pursuance to the said directions when a letter received to the answering respondent from the office of Advocate General, the answering respondent on 1.10.2019 wrote a letter to the Joint Director of Town and Country Planning, seek information whether the mining activities are in green belt are not ?
(ii) That, on 12.7.2019 the T.N.C.P. has also informed that as per that as per Master Plan 2021 the village Revati's Survey No.123 (entire Khasra) is prepared for recreation (Aamod-Pramod) and way and further Umariya Khurd's Survey No. 90 (Entire Khasara) is also reserved for recreation (Aamod-Pramod) of Indore Develpment Plan 2021 has not permitted to use the Stone Crusher/Mining quarry.
That, on 30.10.2019 the Joint Director in response to letter dated 1.10.2019, has stated that the land of Survey No.123 situated at village Revati, Tehsil Sanwer as per Indore Development Plan 2021 is kept for recreation (Aamod-Pramod) and way. According to list 6.22 (Aamod-Pramod) of Indore Development Plan 2021 has not permitted to use the Stone Crusher / Mining quarry.
(iii) That, further on 26.9.2019 the respondent No.5 has issued an order to the Mining Officer, Indore to stop all the mining activities of nearby hill areas like Revati Range, Umaria Khurd and other location/Hills and mountains.
(iv) That, all the sub ordinate authorities to the Collector has taken action in pursuance of order dated 26.9.2019, and has instructed to stop all the mining activities of nearby hilly areas. A copy of the additional reply dated 5.10.2019 is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure R/3.
The District Magistrate/Collector is filing the present reply in compliance of the order dated 21.10.2019 the same may kindly be taken on record.
In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the respondents in this return, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief from this Hon'ble court as well as interim relief and the petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be dismissed with costs.
...7...
An affidavit of Collector in support of this reply is being filed herewith.
P RAYE R It is, therefore, prayed that this detailed reply may kindly be taken on record and the petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be dismissed with costs.
Indore
Dated 27.11.2019 Submitted by,
(Lokesh Kumar Jatav)
Collector Indore
3. The learned Collector filed an affidavit after verifying record in respect of village Reoti. The record received from Town and Country Planning Department and the Master Plan for Indore City reveals that undisputedly the area in question, ie., area nearby hills like Reoti range Umariya Khurd and other locations of the adjoining mountains are certainly under the Green Belts.
4. In light of the reply filed by the Collector and the State Government, the question of mining does not arise.
The learned Collector has also informed that all kinds of mining activities have been stopped.
5. Learned counsel for the M.P. Pollution Control Board Indore has also fairly stated that no mining activity can be carried out in a Green Belt and the mining activities which are being carried out near the Reoti range, ...8...
Umariya Khurd and other locations / hills and mountains have been stopped.
6. An intervener application has also been filed, ie., I.A.No.276/2020.
7. Learned counsel for the intervener submits that he is having all valid permissions. However, he himself has stated in the intervention application that the mining is being going on at a hillock. It is the duty of this court to ensure that the mountains are left for future generations to come. A similar kind of activity was going on in Dewas and on account of intervention of this court now the mining which was going on in an around Dewas by razing the hill to ground has also been stopped and, therefore, in the considered opinion of this court, no such mining permission can be given and in case, if there is any permission, the mining has to be stopped forthwith in respect of Green Belt. This court does not find any reason to interfere with the orders passed by the learned Collector restraining the mine owners who are carrying out mining on hillocks razing the hillocks to the ground (Green Belt).
8. A detailed and exhaustive reply has been filed by the ...9...
BSF and (Mr. Arun Kumar Tambe D.I.G. along with the learned counsel for the Union of India are present before this court.
9. Learned counsel for the Union of India has fairly stated before this court that most of the area where mining is going on has been allotted to BSF. However, demarcation is not being carried out. The area in question is a Green Belt and the D.I.G, BSF has fairly stated before this court that they should be permitted to fence the entire area and they will be doing plantation in the entire area, which will certainly a step forward in preserving the nature and ecology.
10. In response to the notice dated 16.12.2019, a reply has been filed by the mining officer Pradeep Khanna and he has stated before this court that at the time of mining permission was granted the Master Plan was not in force.
He has stated that reply was filed by him based upon the documents available in the Office and there was no ill-will / any intention on his part to mislead this court. This court is satisfied by the reply filed by Shri Pradeep Khanna and, therefore, no further orders are required to be in respect of the reply filed by Shri Pradeep Khanna.
...10...
11. In light of the aforesaid statement, the BSF is permitted to fence the entire area and to take charge of the entire area under their control. The BSF shall also ensure as the area is their under control that no illegal mining takes place at Reoti range or any other hillock near the Reoti range.
12. The State Government will cooperate with BSF in demarcating the area which has been allotted / transferred to the BSF including the entire Green Belt and the exercise be completed positively, within a period of 30 days from today.
13. In light of the aforesaid, as there is a categoric statement on behalf of the Collector, Indore Shri Lokesh Jatav on affidavit that the area which is subject matter of the present petition is Green Belt, the petition stands disposed of with the following directions :-
(a) The area which is subject matter of the present writ petition as well as the other areas which are under the Green Belt / hillocks, no mining activity shall be carried out by any person including the State Government.
...11...
(b) The BSF shall take charge of the area which has already been allotted to the BSF including the area which is part of the Reoti range and the Green Belt within a period of 30 days from today.
(c) The Collector shall carry out the demarcation of the area already allotted to the BSF as well as area falling under Green Belt and shall handover the same to the BSF, within a period of 30 days from today.
(d) The BSF shall initiate forestation of the land immediately and shall take charge of the entire land by fencing it and by keeping it in their control. It shall be the responsibility of the BSF to ensure that no mining activity takes place in respect of the area in question.
14. Accordingly, the petition stands allowed.
(S.C. SHARMA) (SHAILENDRA SHUKLA)
JUDGE JUDGE
SS/-
Digitally signed by Shailesh
Sukhdev
Date: 2020.02.03 12:40:30 +05'30'