National Green Tribunal
C R Vijayakumar vs Seiaa on 22 October, 2021
Bench: K Ramakrishnan, K. Satyagopal
Item No.4:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 101 of 2021 (SZ)
(Through Video Conference)
IN THE MATTER OF
C.R. Vijaykumar
S/o. M.C. Ranganathan
No.223/1, Bajanai Kovil Street,
Unamancheri, Chennai.
...Applicant(s)
Versus
The Member Secretary,
State Environment Impact Assessment Authority,
3rd Floor, Panagal Maligai,
No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai and Ors.
...Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 22.10.2021.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. K. SATYAGOPAL, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Ms. Niveditha S Menon represented
Mr. R. Arun & Mr. R. Sakthinathan.
For Respondent(s): Mrs. M. Sumathi for R1.
Mr. B. Sasidharan represented
Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R2.
Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R3 to R5.
Mr. Mukunth along with Mr. K. Venkatta Subban for
M/s. Sarvabhauman Associates for R6.
Page 1 of 18
ORDER
1. As per order dated 20.09.2021, this Tribunal had considered the report submitted by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board signed by the Additional Chief Environmental Engineer dated 28.07.2021, e-filed on 03.08.2017 and extracted in Para 3 of the order and then, passed the following order:-
"4. Quite unfortunately, this report is also very vague and evasive. They did not mention anything about the compliance or non-compliance of the conditions issued in the Environmental Clearance (EC) or Consent given by the Board. They have not mentioned as to whether any of the conditions imposed have been violated and if so, what is the nature of action taken as well. They did not also mention as to whether any pollution has been caused on account of operating the unit as well.
5. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for the Pollution Control Board submitted that they will come with a detailed report incorporating all these aspects independently, apart from filing the report as a member of the committee.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the State departments is not in a position to say as to whether any inspection has been conducted by the joint committee at all. That also shows the sorry state of affairs of high officials who are expected to protect the environment and file the reports to this Tribunal in time to ascertain the nature of violations (if any) committed and also give necessary directions to protect environment in an effective manner.
7. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for the State department submitted that they will instruct the officials to conduct inspection and submit a report to this Tribunal without delay.
8. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board as well as the committee are directed to submit the report as directed by this Tribunal on or before 22.10.2021 by e-filing in the form of Searchable PDF/OCR Supportable PDF and not in the form of Image PDF along with necessary hardcopies to be produced as per Rules.
9. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the members of the committee, official respondents including the Chief Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Principal Secretary for Environment, Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Chennai, Chairman, SEIAA, Tamil Nadu, Director of Mines and Geology by e-mail immediately for their information Page 2 of 18 and giving direction to the subordinate officials to comply with the direction without delay so as to avoid further coercive action taken that can be by this Tribunal.
10. The Head of the departments are also directed to verify the reports submitted before this Tribunal before it is being filed so as to ensure that all necessary things directed by this Tribunal have been answered in the report filed by them."
2. We have received the Joint Committee report signed by the members on 11.10.2021, e-filed on 21.10.2021 received today (i.e. 22.10.2021) which reads as follows:-
"Joint committee report submitted to the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal (SZ), Chennai
1. PREAMBLE:
In the matter of Original Application Number 101/2021, the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai in its order dated 16.04.2021 has appointed the Directorate of Geology and Mining as the Nodal Agency and also appointed a Joint Committee comprising of following officials and directed to submit a factual as well as action taken report is there is any violation found.
(i) The District Collector, Chengalpattu District, or a Senior Officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector/Sub-Divisional Magistrate as deputed by the District Collector
(ii) A senior officer from the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA),
(iii) A senior from the Directorate of Geology and Mining as deputed by its Director and
(iv) a senior officer from the Tamil Nadu State Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) as deputed by its Chairman to inspect the area in question.
The Committee is also directed to ascertain as to whether;
(i) the 6th respondent is having necessary clearance permission for the purpose of carrying out the quarrying operation,
(ii) whether the 66 respondent had violated the conditions / Page 3 of 18 permission/clearance, if any granted,
(iii) whether the 6th respondent had encroached into other areas than the area permitted under the lease and Environmental Clearance (EC) or permission granted,
(iv) whether the 6th respondent had done any excess mining and if so, what is the quantity of excess mining done,
(v) whether any action has been taken for realization of any penalty or compensation for the alleged excess mining done,
(vi) whether the 6th respondent is continuing with his operation even after the expiry of the validity of Environmental Clearance/ permission granted as alleged in the application and if so, what is the quantity of minerals mined during this period,
(vii) whether the 6th respondent had carried out his obligation undertaken under the Mining Closure Plan in accordance with law and if there is any violation found and damage caused the environment, then assess environmental compensation to be recovered from the 6th respondent.
1.2. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE In compliance to the Hon'ble NGT (SZJ order, a. The Director of Geology and Mining vide Rc.No.2885/MM1/2021 dated 04.05.2021 (Annexure-1) had nominated Tmt. B. Jothi, Deputy Director of Geology and Mining as a member of the Joint committee. Further, in order to assist the Joint Committee during the inspection of the quarry site Thiru. K. Vijayaragavan, Assistant Director (1/c) of Geology and Mining, Chengalpattu and Thiru. S. Velu, Sub-Inspector of Survey, O/o. the Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Tiruvallur had also been deputed by the Director of Geology and Mining vide Rc. No.2885/MM1/2021 dated 10.08.2021 (Annexure-2) b. The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board vide letter No TNPSC/LAW/LA-V/NGT/010203/2021 dated 08.06.2021 had nominated Thiru D. Vasudevan, District Environmental Engineer, Maraimalai Nagar as a member of the Joint committee. (Annexure-3) Page 4 of 18 c. The State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority vide letter No. SEIAA/ Tamil Nadu/ NGT/ 0.A.101 of 2021/2021-1 dated 23.06.2021 had deputed Thiru C.Tholkappian, Assistant Environment Engineer, SEIAA, Tamil Nadu, Chennai as a member of the Joint Committee. (Annexure-4) d. The District Collector, Chengalpattu vide in its Rc.No.6408/Mines/2021 dated 29.06.2021 had deputed Thiru. D.Ravichandiran, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tambaram as a member of the Joint Committee. (Annexure-5) Accordingly, the nominated members of the Joint Committed is given as under.
1. Thiru.D.Ravichandran.
Revenue Divisional Officer, Tambaram. - Member
2. Thiru.D.Vasudevan, District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Maraimalai Nagar. - Member
3. Tmt. D.Jyothi, Deputy Director, Commissionarate of Geology and Mining, Chennai-32 - Member
4. Thiru.C.Tholkappian, Assistant Environment Engineer, SEIAA Tamil Nadu, Chennai - Member
3. PRAYER OF THE WRIT PETITIONER
a) To pass orders forbearing the 6th Respondent from quarry operation in lands in SF Nos. 275/2A, 2B, 2C, 2C2A, 2C2B, 2C2C, 2D1, 2D3, 2D4, 2D5, 273/3 and S.F.NOs 324/1, 324/2, 326/2A, 326/2B of Unamancheri village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu district thereby cancelling of licences / consent / permission /NOCs.
b) Direct respondents 1 to 5 to take immediate action against the 6th Page 5 of 18 Respondent for illegal quarrying operations.
c) Direct respondents 1 and 5 to assess, levy and collect a pollution fine from the 6th respondent for the illegal quarrying carried on.
d) Issue such other orders as it deems fit in the interest of the case and thus render justice.
c) Further, the petitioner in his application dated 16.5.2021 filed before National Green Tribunal, South zone at Chennai has also pointed out violation in the quarry granted in SF.No.273/1, 319/1, 326/1A, 326/4 in Unamancherri village, Chengalpattu Taluk and Kancheepuram District and the lease, expired on 13.11.2018.
4. Observation of the Joint Committee The Joint Committee had inspected the area under lease granted to 6th respondent Thiru.U.G.C.Aravind dated 02.09.2021. The Assistant Director and Assistant Geologist, Department of Geology and Mining, Kancheepuram, Assistant Environmental Engineer, Pollution Control Board, Maraimalai Nagar, Tahsildar, Vandalur Taluk, the Head Surveyor, Vandalur, Firka Surveyor and the Revenue Inspector, Unamancheri and the Village Administrative Officer, Unamancheri were also present and assisted the committee at the time of inspection.
The lessee Thiru.U.G.C.Aravind was also present at the time of inspection of the quarry sites.
The Officials of Revenue and Survey Departments i.e., the Firka Surveyor and the Village Administrative Officer, Unamancheri Village had identified the boundaries of the area granted under lease in respect of leases mentioned by the petitioner in Unamancheri village and the dimensions of the quarried pit had been measured with Total Station instruments.
In then Kancheepuram District, presently Chengalpattu District there are 12 Rough stone and Gravel quarry leases in Unamancheri village of Chengalpattu Taluk existing from the year 2004 onwards. Cumulatively the quarry operation had been carried over an extent of 9.99.80 ha out of 24.68.00 ha. All the leases are merged together and formed a single pit and the part of pit is filled with rain water (water logged). Presently, the 6th respondent is carrying rough stone quarry operation in two valid leases only remaining are abandoned quarries. The details of leases granted in Page 6 of 18 Unamancheri village are as follows:
TABLE I Page 7 of 18 11 UGC Aravind, 324/1,2, 0.95.50 Rc.1302/Q2/2017 08.11.2018 to No.9, Pillaiyar Koil 326/2A, 2B Dated 08.11.2018 07.11.2023 Street, Unamancheri Village, Chengalpattu Taluk.
12 UGC Aravind, 275/2A, 2B, 1.10.50 Rc.1303/Q2/2017 08.11.2018 to
No.9, Pillaiyar Koil 2C1, 2C2A, Dated 08.11.2018 17.11.2023
Street, Unamancheri 2C2B, 2C2C,
Village, Chengalpattu 2D1, 3, 4, 5,
Taluk. 277/3
The Joint Committee had conducted the detailed survey in three leases (2 existing leases and 1 old lease) which are pointed out by the petitioner and inspection report is furnished as below:
4.1 Lease I (old quarry):- S.F.Nos.273/1 etc., over an extent of 1.77.50 ha
i) A Rough Stone and Gravel quarry lease had been granted for a period of five years to Thiru.U.G.C.Aravind for quarrying Rough stone and Gravel over an extent of 1.77.5 ha of patta lands in SF Nos. 273/1, (0.39.0), 319/10.30.5), 326/1A (0.09.0) and 326/4 (0.99.0) of Unamancheri village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District vide Kanchipuram District Collector Proceedings Rc.No.72/2012/Q3/ dated 14.11.2013. The lease deed was executed on 14.11.2013 and the lease expired on 13.11.2018.
(Annexure-6)
ii) The lessee had obtained Environmental clearance from the State level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority for a period of 5 years from the date of execution of lease deed vide Lr. No. SEIAA-TN/ F.No.1339/ EC /1(a) / 594 /2013 dated 18.07.2013 subject to the conditions stipulated for quarrying of Rough Stone and Gravel in SF.No.273/1, etc., to the tune of 37411 cbm and 24688 cbm respectively for a depth of 30 m. (Annexure-7)
iii) The lessee had also obtained TNPCB consent vide CTO Proc. No.F.0273/ MMN/ RS/ DEE/ TNPCB/ MMN/ W&A/ 2015 dated. 18/06/2015 valid up to July 17, 2018 subject to comply with the conditions in the EC and quarry lease agreement. (Annexure-8)
iv) Findings observed are as follows:
a) As per lease deed conditions the required safety distance of 7.5 and 10mts has not been provided to the adjacent Patta and Poramboke lands and quarrying had been carried out in the safety zone area also.Page 8 of 18
b) Boundary pillars have not been erected and maintained all along the boundary of the lease granted area as per rule 36(4) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1959.
c) The lessee had not maintained 5m height and width for benches with 45 degree slope from horizontal in order to avoid untoward incident as per regulation 106(2)(a) of the Metalliferrous Mines Regulations 1961 and also the lessee had not carried out the quarrying operations in a skillful, scientific and systematic manner keeping in view of proper safety of the labourers.
d) Mining operation is approved up to depth of 30 m (below ground level) in environmental clearance whereas the lessee had carried out the mining operation in SF.No.326/4 to a maximum depth of 47.5 m over an extent of 0.67.5 ha out of 1.77.5 Hectares.
e) As per the pit measurement, it is estimated that a quantum of 62,934 cbm of gravel and 4,03,835 cbm of rough stone had been quarried from the area granted under lease in S.F. Nos. 273/1, (0.39.0), 319/1(0.30.5), 326/1A (0.09.0) and 326/4 (0.99.0).
4.2 Lease II:- S.F. Nos. 324/1 etc., over an extent of 0.95.50 ha - Existing Quarry
i) A Rough Stone and Gravel quarry lease had been granted for a period of five years to Thiru. U.G.C. Aravind for quarrying Rough stone and Gravel over an extent of 0.95.50 ha of patta lands in SF Nos. 324/1 (0.22.50), 324/2 (0.25.00), 326/2A (0.24.00) and 326/2B (0.24.00) of Unamancheri village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District vide Kanchipuram District Collector Proceedings Rc No.1302/ 02/ 2017 dated 8.11.2018. The lease deed was executed on 8.11.2018 and the lease is valid upto 7.11.2023. (Annexure-9)
ii) The lessee had obtained Environmental clearance from the District level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority for a period of 5 years from the date of execution of lease deed vide Lr. No. DEIAA- DIA/TN/MIN/1302/Q2/2017 -KPM EC.No.24-2018 dated: 03.10.2018 subject to the conditions stipulated therein for quarrying of Rough Stone and Gravel in SF.No.324/1 etc., to the tune of 33490 cbm and 16848 cm respectively. (Annexure-10)
iii) The lessee had also obtained TNPCB consent vide CTO Proc.
Page 9 of 18NO.F.2038MMN/ RS/ DEE/ TNPCB/ MMN/ W&A/ 2018 dated. 30/11/2018 valid up to 31-03-2023 subject to comply with the conditions in the EC and quarry lease agreement. (Annexure-11)
iv) Findings observed in the lease granted area are;
a) As per lease deed conditions the required safety distance of 7.5 m had been provided to the adjacent patta lands and quarrying operation carried out over an extent of 0.60.00 ha out of 0.95.50 ha.
b) Boundary pillars have been maintained on the northern area, other sides not maintained all along the boundary of the lease granted area as per rule 36(4) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1959
c) The lessee has not maintained 1.5m height and width for benches with 45 degree slope from horizontal in order to avoid untoward incident as per regulation 106(2)(a) of the Metalliferous Mines Regulations 1961 and also the lessee had not carried out the quarrying operation in a skillful, scientific and systematic manner keeping in view of proper safety of the labourers.
d) The lessee had monitored the quality of the ground water and air sampling survey in and around the quarry site periodically.
e) Mining operation is approved up to a depth of 28 m (below ground level) in the mining plan / environmental clearance and the lessee had carried out the mining operation to a depth of 20 m.
f) As per the pit measurement, it is estimated that a quantum of 42573 cbm of gravel and 74177 cbm of rough stone had been quarried from the area granted under lease in SF. Nos 324/1 (0.22.50), 324/2 (0.25.00), 326/2A (0.24.00) and 326/2B (0.24.00).
4.3 Lease III :- S.F.Nos.275/2A etc., over an extent of 1.10.50 ha - Existing Quarry
i) A Rough Stone and Gravel quarry lease had been granted for a period of five years to Thiru.U.G.C.Aravind for quarrying Rough stone and Gravel over an extent of 1.10.50 ha of patta lands in SF.Nos. 275/2A (0.07.00), 275/2B (0.10.00), 275/2C1 (0.09.00), 275/2C2A (0.06.50), 275/2C2B (0.02.50), 275/2C2C (0.24.50), 275/2D1 (0.06.00), 275/3 (0.11.50), 275/4 (0.09.50), 275/5 (0.12.00), 277/3 (0.12.00) of Unamancheri village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District vide Kanchipuram District Collector Proceedings Rc.No. 1303/02/2017 dated 8.11.2018. The Page 10 of 18 lease deed was executed on 8.11.2018 and the lease deed is valid upto 7.11.2023. (Annexure-12)
ii) The lessee had obtained Environmental clearance from the District level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority for a period of 5 years from the date of execution of lease deed vide Lr. No. DEIAA- DIA/TN/MIN/1303/Q2/2016 KPM, EC. No.25-2018 dated: 03.10.2018 subject to the conditions stipulated therein for quarrying of Rough Stone and Gravel in SF. Nos. 275/2A etc., to the tune of 154190 M3 and 27594 M3 respectively. (Annexure-13)
iii) The lessee had also obtained TNPCB consent vide CTO Proc.NO.F.2037MMN/ RS/ DEE/ TNPCB/ MMN/ W&A/ 2018 dated. 30/11/2018 valid up to 31-03-2023 subject to comply with the conditions in the EC and quarry lease agreement. (Annexure-14)
iv) The lessee had entered into blasting work contract agreement with Sri Sivakumar S/o Sri Jawahar Udayam Explosives, perungalathur for extraction of mineral.
v) Findings observed are as follows:
a) As per lease deed conditions the required safety distance of 7.5 has not been provided to the adjacent patta lands on the southern side and quarrying had been carried out in the safety zone area also.
b) Boundary pillars have not been erected and maintained all along the boundary of the lease granted area as per rule 36(4) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1959.
c) The lessee had not maintained the 1.5m height and width for benches with 45 degree slope from horizontal in order to avoid untoward incident as per regulation 106(2)(a) of the Metalliferous Mines Regulations 1961 and also the lessee had not carried out the quarrying operations in a skillful, scientific and systematic manner keeping in view of proper safety of the labourers.
d) The lessee had monitored the quality of the ground water and air sampling survey in and around the quarry site periodically.
e) Mining operation is approved up to depth of 33 m ( below ground level ) in the mining plan / environmental clearance whereas the lessee had carried out the mining operation to a maximum depth of 20 m i.e., over an extent of 0.22.0 hec out of 1.10.50 ha Page 11 of 18
f) As per the pit measurement, it is estimated that a quantum of 8800 cbm of gravel and 44000 cbm of rough stone had been quarried from the area granted under lease in S.F.Nos. 275/2A (0.07.00), 275/2B (0.10.00), 275/2C1 (0.09.00), 275/2C2A (0.06.50), 275/2C2B (0.02.50), 275/2C2C (0.24.50), 275/2D1 (0.06.00), 275/3 (0.11.50), 275/4 (0.09.50), 275/5 (0.12.00), 277/3 (0.12.00).
7. The quantity of rough stone permitted in the Approved Mining Plan / Environmental Clearance, quantity for which transport permits obtained from the Office of the Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Kanchipuram, and the actual quantum of minerals quarried and removed within the lease hold area granted under lease 1, Il and III in Unamancheri village, Vandalur Taluk, Chengalpattu District are tabulated as below:-
TABLE II Thus, it is estimated that a quantum of 79127 cbm of gravel and 161012 cbm of rough stone had been quarried and removed from the lease hold area without payment of seigniorage fee and without obtaining despatch slips.
6. Encroachment and Illegal quarry in non-lease hold area:
i) The lessee had encroached and indulged in illegal quarrying operation in the adjacent non lease Government poramboke (Medu) in S.F.Nos.271(Part) over an extent of 0.04.5 hec and illegally transported to the tune of 2255 cbm of gravel and 12854 cbm of rough stone.Page 12 of 18
ii) The lessee had also encroached and indulged in illegal quarrying operation in the adjacent non leased Government poramboke (Grazing Ground) in S.F.No. 481 (P) over an extent of 0.04.47 ha and illegally transported to the tune of 2235 cbm of gravel and 12516 cbm of rough stone.
iii) The lessee had also encroached and indulged in illegal quarrying operation in the adjacent patta land in SF No.326/IB (Part) over an extent 0.00.86 ha and illegally transported to the tune of 654 cm of gravel and thereby the lessee has contravened the sub section (1) & (1A) of Section 4 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957
iv) Dumping of 58,045 cbn of over burden and weathered rock were noticed in the northern side i.e, non lease hold patta lands in S.F. Nos.306/4 (P), 307 (P), 308/1 (P), 308/4 (P), 325/2A (P) & 354 (P). Within the lease hold area, 2250 cbm of earth and 1000 chm of Tough stone were stocked in the bench of down side area.
Abstract of Quantity of Minerals Quarried and Transported Illegally - TABLE III The topographical base plan and details of survey carried out by Sub Inspector of Survey, 0/0 Assistant Director, Geology and Mining, Tiruvallur dated 06-09-2021 to 16.09.2021 [camp at Kancheepuram is Page 13 of 18 enclosed (Annexure-15).
Photographs taken during inspection are enclosed (Annexure 16a and 16b).
7. The District Forest Officer has represented in letter Ref. No.4274/2012 dated 04.09.2020 that the patta lands falling in S.No.273/1 (0.39.0 Hect.), 319/1 (0.30.5), 326/1A (0.09.0) and 326/4 (0.990) over an extent of 1.77.5 ha in Unamancheri village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District is not a part and parcel of any forest area notified under the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882. The area is also not qualified to define as forest as per the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in W.P.(C) 202/1995. Thus, the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is not applicable. As stated in the District Collector reference the 7.5 metres strip of the forest land all along the outer boundary of the mining lease area shall be maintained as per the Government of India instructions. The provisions of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1959, Environment Protection Act 1986 and rules framed therein and Board standing orders shall also be followed scrupulously. In the light of the above, there is no objection with reference to the forest laws in this matter subject to the fulfilment of all other regulations prescribed in the relevant law. (Annexure-17)
8. Environmental compensation and cost required for Environmental damages As per the CPCB guidelines the Environmental compensation shall be calculated as Environmental compensation to be paid (EC) = PI X NxRx S x LF Where, PI - Pollution index of industrial sector - For Red category [SI.No. 1085) it is 60 to 100. An average value of 80 taken N - Number of days of violation took place Page 14 of 18 Hence, it may be considered that the proponent has taken the excess mining from the date of commissioning from 18.06.2015 (818 days) R = A factor in Rupees for EC is minimum of 100 and maximum of
500. An average value of Rs.250 taken for violation S = Factor for scale of operation (0.5 for small, 1.0 for medium and 1.5 for large scale). Hence 0.5 taken since it is small scale.
LF = Location factor (population from 1 to <5 million LF is 1.25) EC = 80x818x Rs. 250x0.5x1.25 = Rs. 1,02,25,000-/ It is respectively submitted that the proponent may be issued with directions to remit the Environmental compensation of Rs. 1,02,25,000/- under section 5 of Environmental [Protection) act, 1986 as amended after giving an opportunity to the proponent.
9. Recommendations:-
i) For illegal and unlawful quarrying and transportation of 84271 of gravel and 186382 cum of rough stone and gravel necessary penal action has to be initiated by the concerned authority as per 6.0.170 industries department dated 05.08.2020 and the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959.
ii) For the violations of lease deed conditions, penalty action may be imposed in respect of such breach, and may cancel the lease after granting an opportunity of hearing to the lessee as per the Rule 36 (5) (h) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959.Page 15 of 18
iii) Since at present further quarrying in the subject area is a threat to the life of the quarry workers, further quarrying may be allowed only after taking remedial measures and after getting concurrence from the Director General of Mines Safety and District Collector
iv) The committee recommends that drone survey be under taken for the existing / proposed quarries at the expense of the lessee twice in a year through the empanelled agencies.
v) For removal of over and above the approved mining plan quantity of mineral from the lease granted in Sl.No.2, the District Administration had already issued notice demanding cost of mineral for the excess removed quantity to the concerned lessee.
vi) Action may be initiated demanding cost of mineral for removal of over and above the approved mining plan quantity of mineral from the quarry mentioned in Sl. 3 of Table II
vii) The committee recommends that the lessee shall deposit Environmental Compensation as appealed by Hon'ble National Green Tribunal (SZ) in the TNPCB - Environmental Compensation Fund payable at Chennai. The amount shall be used for restoration of environment and for necessary remedial and preventive measures in regard to environmental matters."
3. Mr. M.R. Gokul Krishnan has filed Memo of Appearance for the 1st respondent e-filed on 21.10.2021 and received today, but Mrs. M. Sumathi, learned counsel had also filed Memo of Appearance on 02.10.2021 and received on 04.10.2021.
4. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel Ms. Ojas Sivakumar who is representing Mr. M.R. Gokul Krishnan submitted that if Mrs. Sumathi has been appointed by the SEIAA, Tamil Nadu earlier, Mr. M.R. Gokul Krishnan is prepared to withdraw the Memo of Appearance filed by him Page 16 of 18 and that submission is recorded.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent submitted that they have not received the copy of the report and they want to file objections to the report submitted by the Joint Committee.
6. Considering the circumstances, we feel that some time can be granted to the applicant as well as to the 6th respondent to file their objections (if any) to the joint committee report and also other respondents to file their pleadings before the next hearing date.
7. They are directed to file their pleadings and objections (if any) to the joint committee report on or before 15.11.2021 by e-filing in the form of Searchable PDF/OCR Supportable PDF and not in the form of Image PDF along with necessary hardcopies to be produced as per Rules.
8. In the meantime, the official respondents are also directed to file their independent action taken report (if any) initiated on the basis of the joint committee report before the next hearing date.
9. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the official respondents by e-mail immediately so as to enable them to comply with the direction.
Page 17 of 1810. For objections (if any) to the report, completion of pleadings and consideration of report, post on 15.11.2021.
Sd/-
......................................J.M. (Justice K. Ramakrishnan) Sd/-
.................................E.M. (Dr. K. Satyagopal) O. A. No. 101/2021 (SZ) 22nd October, 2021. Mn.
Page 18 of 18