National Green Tribunal
Sakthivel vs Ministry Of Environment Forest And ... on 4 January, 2022
Bench: K Ramakrishnan, K. Satyagopal
Item No.04: BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI Original Application No. 213 of 2021 (SZ) (Through Video Conference) IN THE MATTER OF: S. Sakthivel, Environmental Protection & Anti Polluti Salem .... Applicant(s) HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER For Applicant(s): Mr. Sivaramakrishnavivekanand For Respondent(s): Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R2 & R3 Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R4 Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad for R5 Mr. T. Poornam for R6 ORDER
1. As per order dated 06.10.2021, this Tribunal had admitted the matter and appointed a Joint Committee to go into the question and submit a report. The case was originally posted to 16.11.2021 for appearance of parties, en of pleadings and also for consideration of report. Th t, the matter has been adjourned either at the - of or ee Lastly the NX 9 Paes HON Se had entered ity
3. The 5™ respondent/Central Ground Water Author led their counter statement. Service Complete.
appearance and fi
4. The 2" respondent/Department of Geology and Mines also filed a status report dated 03.01.2022, e-filed on 04.01.2022 which reads as follows:-
Status Report filed by the Second Respondent 1, Thira L.Nirmaf Raj, S/o. Thiru K Lakshmana Perumal, Hindu, aged about 49 years msiding at Chennai do hereby solemmly affinn and sincerely state as follows:-
iam the Director of Geology and Mining, the 2™ raspondernt herein and | arn well acquainted with the facts of the case frara the records. As directed by this Hon'ble National Greer Triburral on 98.70.2027 in this original application, | am filing this status repart.
2 fis submitted that the petitioner has Med G.A.No 243 of 2024 before this Harrble Tnbunal with a prayer among other things that i To declare the operation of ihe Respondent No.@ as Hlegal, unauthorized and in violation of the Enwronment (Protection) Act, 1886.
3%. To restrain the Respondent No.8 from earrying or further antiviies without mandate Environmenial Clearance and NOG from CGWA.
"i. Ta direct the Respondent No.6 to pay Environmental Compensetion as may be determined oy the Hor'ble Tribunal, 2 ft is further submitted that this Hon'ble Tribunal by Order dated 06.10.2021 appointed a Joint Gormmiltee consisting of (1) The District Collector, Salern or his nominee not below the rank of Assistant Collector of Sub Divisional Magistrate as nominated by the District Caliector (2) A Senior officer from Ministry of Enviranment, Forest and Climate Change, Integraied Regional Office, Chennai G) The Director, Department of Geology and Mining or his nominee as nominated by the Cirector not below the rank of Additional Director af Mining and Geology (4) The District Environmental Engineer, Tarnil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Salem district (5) A Senior officer from the Public works Department, Groundwater Division, Salem district to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken repon, if there is any violation found.
4. it is further submitted that the Hon'ble Tribunal has directed the Committee to ascertain as to whether, in The 6° respondent is having all necessary permissions/clearances from the authorities under the Enviranmental Law, Whether the 6" respondent is conducting mining in vidiation of the environmental laws without obtaining necessary clearance / permissions, if so since when they are doing the same, What is the quantity of the mineral extracted by doing such legal mining, what is the nature of action taken by the authorities when such violations are brought to their notice, Whether any darnage is caused to the Environment on account of the illegal mining done by the 6" respondent unit, and if so assess the damage caused ta the environment including the environmental cornpensation to be recovered from them, apart fram suggesting recommendation for restoration for damage caused te the environment, Whether the respondent had obtained necessary permission for extracting groundwater for their industrial purpose and if not, what ts the action taken including the imposition of compensation for un-authorized drawl of groundwater by the 8° respondent, & {tf ie further submitted that in compliance to the orders passed by this Horble Tribunal, the District Collector, Salem has nominaied the Sub Collector) Sub Divisional Magistrate, Metlur as representative on behalf the District Collector, Salem. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF & CC), Integrated Regional Office, Chennai has nominated Or.C Palpandi, Scientist D" as tha member of the Jcint Committee. Further, Tamil Nadu pollution Control Board, Chennai has nominated the District Environmental Engineer, TNPCB, Salern as member of the Joint Committee on behalf of the TNPCB.
&. Ht is further submitted that when the matter came up for hearing on 16.11.2024, this Hon'ble Tribunal has granted time upto 20.12.2021 for filing report of the joint cammitties.
7. i is further submitted that Tvl Daimis Cement Bharat Limited wag granted with a mining lease for mining Magnesife over an exient of 4388.56 acres of Government Poramboke lands in S.F.No.@ af Chettichavadi Jagir vilage, Salem taluk & district for a period of 20 years vide G.O.Ms.No.908, Industries Labour and Co-Operation Oepartment dated 25.02.1968. The lease deed was executed on 30.08.1986 and the lease period was valid upto 19.08.1986.
8 {tis further submitted that Tvl Dalmia Cement Bharat Limited was granted with mining lease for mining Dunite over an extent of 14R6.36 acres of Government Poramboke lands in S.F.No.6 of Chettichavad! dagir village, Salem taluk & district for a period Lpto 49.08.7086 vide G.O.Ms No.804, Industries Depariment, dated 26.06. 1976.
9, it is further submitted that Tvl Daimia Cements Bharat Limited was granted with first renewal of mining lease for mining Magnesite & Dunite over an extent of 1314 acres of Government Poramboke lands in S.F.No6 of Chettichavadi Jagir village, Salern taluk & district for a period of 20 years from 20.08.1986 ta 19.08.2006 vide G.O.Ms.No.74 Industries (MMD.1}Departrnent, dated 14.03.1997.
10. it is further submitted that Tvl Daimia Cement Bharat Lid had filed Second Renewal of Mining lease application on 11.07.2008 in the prescribed Form-J for grant of second renewal of mining lease for mining Magnesite and Dunite over an extent of 449.36.4 hectares of Government Poramboke lands in S.F No.6 of Cheftichavadi Village, Salem West Taluk Salem District for a further period of 20 years from 20.08.2006, The Second Renewal of mining fease application was flac in time Le. 12 months before the expiry of first renewal of mining lease and the 8° respondent had carried out mining operations in the sublect area under the deemed extension provisions of Rule 24A (6) of Mineral Canvcession Rules, 1860.
11. It is further submitted that, the 6" respondent vide letter dated 19.09.2011 informed that the name and style of Tvl. Dalmia Cements Bharat Limited was changed to Tvi.Dalmia Bharat Sugars and Industries Limited and the same was taken on record by the Government, Td. His further submitted that, since the inception of Mining lease in the subject area from the year 19668. mining operations were carried out by the 6" respondent without obtaining Environmental Clearance fram the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Goverment of india. The 6° respondent had applied on 09.02.2008 for grant of Environmental Clearance before the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India. Whereas, the 6" respondent has not been issued Y with Environment Clearance. sa far from the Ministry af Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India.
43. in this connection (t (6 subrniited that the Jucgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of india in the matter af Common Cause Vs. Linon of india In WLPLNo. 114 of 2044 dated 02.08 2017 made under para 128, 120, 180 and 16 are extractect hereunder:-
#28. The simple reason for not accepting ihis interpretation is thaf Rule 2 fia} af the Mineral Gonoessicvt Rules, 1960 was inserted by a notification dated 28° JULY, 2042 while we are concemed with an earker period. That apart, as mentionad above, the holder of a mining jease is required ic acthere fo fhe tennis of Ike mining scheme, ihe mining plan and tie mining lease as well as stables such as the EPA the FCA ihe Water (Prevention and Contro! of Pollution) Sot. 1974 and fie Al (Prevention and Control af Pollution) Act, 7987. if any nining operation is conducted in violation of any of these reguirements then that nuning aperation is Hegal or unfawdy. Any extraction of a mineral through an ilegal or unavwtid mimng operation would become illegally or aniawfully exdraciad mineral.
929, ff is nat as suggested by feamed course! ihat eget me is confined only fo mvining operadians outside a leased arsa. Such an activity is ebviousiy Hlegal ar unlawt mining. ilegal mining takes within ds fold excess extraction of a mineral over the peymissible fmt even edthin the mining lease area which is hald under lawful autharity, if thal excess extraction is contrary fo the mining scheme, the mining plan, the mining pase ar a siautory requirement Even otherwise, if is not possible for us to accapt the narrow interpretation soughl io be canvassed by ieamed counsel! for the Jnining iease f -
holders particuiarly since we are dealing with a natural resource which is intended for the benefit of everyone and not only for the benefit of the mining lease holders.
150, in our opinion, Section 21/8} of ihe Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act 1957 Act is applicable when any person raises, without any lawl authority, any mineral from any land. in that event, the State Government is entified fo recover from such person the mineral so reised or where the mineral has already been disposed of the price thereof as compensation. The wards 'any fand' are not confined to the mining lease area. As far as the mining lease area is cancerned, extraction of a mineral aver and above what is permissible under the mining plan or under the EC undoubledly attracts the provisions of Section 24{5} of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Reguiation) Act, 1957 being extraction without Jawful auifiority. it would also attract Section 27 (1) of ihe Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation} Act, 1957. in any event, Section 218) of the Act is certainly attracted and is not limited to a violation commited by @ person aniy outside the mining lease area # includes a violation committed even within the mining lease area. This is aiso because the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation} Act, 1957 is intended, among other things, to penalize ilegal or unlawful mining on any land including mining lease fand and also preserve and protect the environment. ----~ =
753. in our opinion, there can be no compromise on the quantum of campensation that should be recovered from ay defauiting lessee ~ if should be 100%. If thers fas been illegal 10 mining, the defaulting fesse must bear the consequences of the illegality and not be benefited by pocketing 70% of the iNegally mined ore. i simply does not sland fo reason why the Stale should be compelled fo forego what is ts due from the exploitation of a natural resource and on ihe cantrary be a party in filing the coffers of defaulting lessees in an Hf gotten Tsang, 44 fig further submitted that pursuant to ine ducigaemeni of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated O2.08.2047 in the matier of Cammon Cause vs Union of india, the Ministry of Environment & Forest and Climate Change issued directions vide their Office Memorandum dated 30.05.2078 towat ds collection of 100% cost of mineral for the quanturn af rninerais minest and transported without abtaining statutory clearances such ag Environment Clearance etc. +5. it is further submitted that in compliance to the orders passed by the Hor ble Supreme Court of india dated OF.08.2017 in the matter of Common Cause Vis Union of india and a8 directed by fhe Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change in ther Cfica Memorandum dated 30.05.2078, demand notice was issued by the District Collector, Salem vide Re. No.45/ 2018/01) Mines-A dated 18.06.2019 with a direction to the @* respondent to remit a sum of Rs.11,44,30,605/- towards cost of mineral for the quantum of Dunite mined and wansnorted witheut obtaining Environment Clearance for the period fram 01.04. 2000 to 21.08.2078. It is also submited herewith that the working of iis needs & ravisit in the ght of the extent involved.
48 ig farther submitted that the eg respondent Ned Writ Patition Nos. 88g of 2020 and |c4 of 2080 before the Han ble Madras High Court challenging the demand notice issued by the "y vs yt 11 District Collector, Salem towards recovery of 100% cast of mineral mined and transported from the subject area without obtaining Environmental Clearance for the period from 61.04.2000 to 31.08.2018, 17 it is further submitted that, the Hon'ble Madras High Court by Cammon Order dated 12.08.2020 in WP Nos. 26808 of 2019, 27182 of 2019 etc, $89 of 2020, 894 of 2020 etc.. dismissed all the 17S writ petitions with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- each.
18.it is further submitted that aggrieved by the Common Order dated 12.06.2020 passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court, the 6" respondent has filed Writ Appeals No. 634 and 835 of 2020.
The Writ Appeal filed by the 6" respondent is pending before the Hon'ble First Bench of Madras High Court and no stay has been granted in the Writ Appeal.
19. Ht is further submitted that another demand notice was issued by the District Collector, Salem vide Reo. No.45/2018/ Mo/Mines-A dated 08.07.2020 with a direction fo the g respondent to remit a sum of Rs.?,24,73,.501/- towards cost of mineral for the quantum of Magnesite mined and transported by them without obtaining Environment Clearance for the period from 01.04.2000 to 31.03.2018.
20, it is further submitted that as directed by this Han'ble Tribunal, the second respondent along with the following nominated members of the Jaint committee had inspected the subject area on 27.19.2021.
i) Name & Designation Department i t i Ne. | bo.
"1 Br. Paipandi. Scientist 50°" MOR @ GE IRS Ehanar i i j 12 t jevveecnencenenaegisee se reepeenannnnanenaneseas se svagnanaamgag sereta ase rruemnasnanan sg 0 07 TTT naannnetasseerceee eee pentane seen eS ra) Thiru. Veer Pratap Singh, Sub- | Salem District | Collector, x g | Environmental Engineer. | Board, Salem 30° Fhira' Gopalakrishnan, District | Famiinadu Pollution Control |
4. Thiru, Ko Suresh, Assistant | Public Works Department, { | Director. "Groundwater Geolagical | | subdivision, Salem Nurring the inspection, the Joint committee noticed that fragh mining operations were carried out in the subject area and Magnesite and Dunile mined were stacked in the area. Further, noserved that one bore well is located in S.FLNo.8 of Chettichavac Vilage.
24 it is further submitted that, the 2°° respondent vide proceedings Ro No. T355/MMa2008 dated 05.12.2021 has formed threa teams of officials fram the Directorate of Gealogy and Mining fo carry out detailed survey of the subject area and to assess the actual quantum of minerals mined and transported by the ge respondent without obtaining Environrnental Clearance from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of india. The teams have been further directed fo consider the parameters such as total ait volume, minerals stocked in the subject area, quantum of mineral transported by the 8° respondent with the transport permiis obtained frorn the office of the Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Salem, durnp stacks, recovery percentage af mineral, etc., while assessing the quantity of minerals mined and transported by the 6" respondent from the subject area.
3 ft i further submitted that the teams of officials Rat commenced surveying of the subject ares with Total Station fram OF 12.2024 onwards and the survey work Is atl in progress. The i;
eo iy if 13 Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Salem District has reported that the lease boundaries of the subject leasehold area were identified with the assistance of the Village Administrative Officer, Chettichavadi Village and the Firka Surveyor, Alagapuram. The Mines Manager of the 6" respondent was also present at the time of inspections carried out by the team of officials.
23. lt is further submitted that the team of officials have submitted a joint intenm report stating that the topography of the area is undulated in nature and therefore surveying of the subject area with Total Station, assessment on the quantum of minerals mined and transported, quantum of mineral stocked and waste dumps in the subject area requires considerable time. Apart fram that the subject area was held under mining lease from the year 1966 onwards and therefore the records related to the quantity of minerals permitied for production as per the Approved Mining Plan/Scheme of Mining, quantity of minerals mined and transparted by the 6° respondent with transport permits and the actual quanturn of minerals mined and transported from the subject area are to be assessed for arriving a conclusion and for filing a comprehensive report before this Hon'ble Tribunal. Besides, the compliance of the terms and conditions of the lease deed executed by the 6 respondent in respect of the subject area are also to be verified by the team of officials formed for this purpose.
24. lt is further submitted that the Assistant Director, Public Works Department, Ground Water Geolagical Sub Division, Salem has reported that the 6° respondent has applied for Ground water No Objection Certificate on 22.09.2021 to the Chief Engineer, SGSSWRDC, Chennai. A detailed Hydrogeological field study and pumping test was conducted in the bore well situated in SF.No.6 of Chettichavadi village and based on the present hydrogeolagical i.
i?
fy s $ % MEE 14 conditians and the pumping test resulls if was recommended ta the Chief Engineer to draw 70,000 LPD of groundwater for the drinking, domestic and afforestation purpose. Based on the report, the Chiet Engineer, State Ground and Surface Water Resource Data Centre, Taramani, Chennai has issued groundwater NOC vide letter No OTSIAG-2/T7OINOC Salem/2021 dated 17.77.2021 for the purpose of domestic including afforesiation, which is after the date af issue of the directions by this Hon'ble Tribunal.
38 {t is further submitted that the Assistant Director, Public Works Department has further reporied that the imposition of compensation for unauthorized draw! of groundwater has been eaicuisied based on CGWA Notification dated 24.08.2020 and the restoration charge is calculated based on the Enviranmental compensation rate for groundwater in the over exploited area with number employs and number of years and intal restoratian charge has been assessed as As.7,17 46,1247.
28, is submitted that the Scientist 'D', MoEFCC, RO, Chennai has reported thal, the 8° respondent has performed mining activily without obtaining pricr Environmental Clearance untl 2017 and the 6" respondent submitted proposal for Terms Of Reference under violation category as per MoEF notification. The 6" respondent has obtained Terms of Reference (ToR) as per Ministry of Environment ang Forest & CC OM No.S-S50/2017-IAHNPS dated 30.65.2078, é- A401 S/A9RO1TBIAIUMD dated 166.2018 and Z1-100/20 J 5 TATE dated 2.11. 2018 under visiation category.
"7 itis further submitted that, the application submitied by the 8° respandent fer getting ToR under violation category, the Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change has issued 5 fatier dated 25.17.2020 to the State Government fo take action against the proponent under Section 49 of Environment Protection if 15 Act.1886 and to submit the report. During the visit the joint committee noticed that there are 13 mining pis and measurements were also taken. Accordingly, the catoulation for finding out the quantity of minerals extracted without valid Environments! Clearance is in progress.
28. ft is also submitted that, the Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change vide Letter No. F No.23-237/2078. IAIN) dated 5.22021 has issued ToR under violation case and directed fo assess the ecological damages with respect to air, land, water and other environmental attribute by a laboratory notified under EP Act 1986 or NABL accredited lab/ or a lab of CSIR warking in the field of enviranment. It is also directed to prepare a remediation plan ani fo prepare a natural and community augmentation plan corresponding to the ecological damages.
29. Ht is submitted that. as per the TOR issued, pubie hearing was conducted on 03.09.2021 in the presence of the Distinct Collector and the EIA & EMP repons were also submitted, The 6" respondent have obtained permission from Water Resource Department for extracting ground water.
30. itis submitted that, the joint committee also directed the TNPCB and Ground Water Department fo collect water and soi! for analysis and toa submit the analysis report te the committee for accessing the damage caused to the environment on account of the legal mining. Upon the receipt of analysis report the committee will calculate the environmental compensation to be recavered from them, apart from suggesting recommendations for restoration for damage caused to the anvironment,
31. if is submitted that, the District Environmental! Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Salem has stated that, the em 16 respondent was issued with consent orders under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 as amended and the A (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, as amended to mine 25000 TiMonth of Magnesite and the same was periadically renawed by the Board upto 34.03.2013. Further, the renewal sonsent order under Water (Prevention and Control of Poflution) Act 4974. as amended & the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, as amanded were not issued fo the unit since the unit has not obtained anviranmental clearance.
39 itis further submitted that, the District Envirenmental Engineer has reported thal, the unit increased iis production activily more than the consented quanthy by praducing Dunite without obtaining environmental clearanes under the ELA notification 2006 for which prior Environmental Clearance is required to be obtained fram the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New Delhi, as per EIA Notification 2006. However, he oriar EC was obiained by them. The 6" respondent has reported in i's letter dated 05.71.2014 that the Dunite production was as follows-
Year UU Bunite Production in | Tannes BOOT 8616 OTERO 39000 | Sots "45150 2013-14 9356 2014-18 2950 Fcc cceceenenagnnnnnnnesisenenncnuadtneetnenennneaneueenennerennanauansaenseen J
33. ig also submitted that the District Environmental Engineer, has informed thal, as per the Environmental impact Assessment Notification 2006, Expansion and madernization of ak 17 existing projects or activities attracts the penal provision of the Environment {Protection} Act 1986. Hence, the 6" respondent should submit its application ta the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of india, for obtaining past facto Environmental Clearance for the enhanced Production beyond the base line production of the year 1993- 1884 and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Gavernmant of India (IA Division) requested to take action against the 6" respondent by invoking powers under Section 19 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1886 for the offence under Sectien 15 of the Act for the period for which violation has taken place vide its reference F.INo TiOIS43/2012 -1A Il (M), dated 65/02/2014 for the said Wolation.
34. itis further submitted by the District Environment Enginger that, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India GA Division) vide letter dated 25.11.2020 stated that the mining activity which continue to operate without obtaining Environmental Clearance shall be considered as violation cases and requested to Initiate credible action against the 6" respondent by invoking powers under Section 19 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for the offence under Section 15 of the Act for the period for which violation has faken place.
35. His submitted that, the Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pallution Contral Board, Chennai vide fetter dated 18.12.2020 directed the District Environmental Engineer, Tamilnadu Pollution Control Board, Salem to take action against the 6" respondent for the violations. In the meanwhile, a show cause notice was issued to the 6" respondent on 04.05.2020 for producing the Dunite without obtaining prior Epvironmental i 3 i of is hy ak rS $ ¥ 7 Sy pwetef?
tee ee 18 Clearance violating tha provisions of EIA Notification, 2008 enacted under the Environment (Protection) Act 1 886 and Sonsent of the Board under the provision of Water {Pravention and Control of Pollution Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and thereby violated the provisians of above said Acts.
38 itis submitted that the District Environment Engineer has siated that the reply of the 6" respondent fer the show cause notice was not satisfactory and therefore, itis proposed to fie a case under section 200 of criminal procedure cade for offence u/s read with 17 & 19 (a) of the Environment (Protection) Act, {986 in Judicial Magistrate Court, Salem for the above said yiolation.
a7. f ix further submitted that, the 8° respondent have filed Writ petition No. 26275 of 2076 before the Han'ble Madras High Court with a prayer to Issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondants from interfering with the mining operations of the petitioner in the Petition Schedule Premises and directing the respondents to continue tp issuc permits fo excavate minerals namely Magnesite and Dunite on payment of requisite royalty and without insisting on Envirenmental Clearance Certificate, The writ petition is listed for hearing before the Hon'ble Madras High Court an 04.01.2022.
Under the circumstances stated above, it is respectfully submited that on completion of survey and assessment works anly, the quantum of minerals mined and transported by the ge respondent without obtaining Environmental Clearance from the subject area and other violations could be assessed by the Team of officials formed for this purposes and there after a comprehensive report could be prepared and fied before this 19 Hon ble grant re) WEAK 2 firrig fay fi re ' ed LEMS TG IEA 8 earn ao Sve :
AAA ESP Seiya re , Natouieity g XN LO Rive MeOart OY ne FOU
5. The first respondent/(MoEF & CC) had filed an independent report dated Nil, e-filed on 04.01.2022..which reads as follows:-
CME SRE FCOIME MIRA BLE NATIONAL CREEN TRIBUNAL SOUP PEEBS RS OME, CDERININAL bo shpylicatiann Wo.) ad of 202} IRGividxak Report om OA WNatis of 202 1(8 23 fled before the Rton" bis PWietionoxt 3 mew EP rittumst, Seuthern ome, tohesamsak, Beetirencdac einer Yo ascertake the genuineness of the ullegations macs in the applimation GLA Mo. Po the Beattie MEF (S23 vide Order dated MG. 10.202) has constituted a Ioint xOtisenittes acimgrising of £3) Ybisuricr Clolicotor, Sabet or his /her mominge mot tetow Bre wari, oF ckasiecen: CoufkecportShuke WDivisiooal Magiatnrate as mominated by the istrict cieiiewtios, Ck a Namiear (fico foom: the Mioishy of Eiavinomument, Porests & Climate Wiaesgee SMES EET 0 Cckimiteeretest Regiomnl Mies, Oheamat, 122 Fhe iSirector cpekstexhiear xox CEeoteoay and. Mihning or an officer mer below fhe rank of Adkhitional ctor mowimated Ge his sie) CMstriet Ernvirorsmental Engineer, Tamil Mine Fooblicaioan wish Rao, Sexheox DHseckot and ¢s3 a Seotor O4fFbrer floor FMT CRrevasiet Water 'isiom, Sater Kotetriet to imapecs thet arca im question and aobroit a feroeal as worl as mations, taker repert, EP thors is any violation. Found.
Axnsoextinty tise Fichet morexnaiiten: caemprising: Of the following offieials visiwed the i ete Om 2. § FAT.
S. We. : Tare 2& Designation R, Nis. Plirmmal Raj Psireetor SPeopea et weet Department or Ciheetogy eared Wfirvsiree, Government of Tard _. Wincha PoaYprsrccdi NOR Sale, IRs, ae So RRO eects i Sfx. Ver Proter Siagh Salem Tistriat } § Soueto. KTerktecesdcer i 20 % Ctechagoy ned Nirie Foverament OF Trarsit Picht Oleaervadias dhoviag the wisity Caring the siate ht fs fort the Use Gta cespomdent has performed mining tev ty wither obinining prbiar ED untii 2037 and thoy have spplied for ECD under violation CALE RNY.
Asuordingly theag obtalnet faa wide F Na Ba-Z27/20PB-LA 0 CV) lated 3.82. 2681 Trans the Ministry of Soviranraant Koroat and CHunate Change unier violation ease and they also completed the Publin hosaring on 02.9902 4b.
Cbhaervadion af the Clomunitios against euck Beceetian givan by the Hantbis NG? {SH Viris Oeder dated 08.10.2021 in QO. No. 21 of 2021 is ae follows:
a. The commited is directed to ascerisio asx faoehether the Gh respoudent is having ait séesesncy permissinnalencances front Mee aithoriies as required merder the eorydronesanrd fete, The Gh respondent is not having all neogssary permiission/clearances fram the authorities as respired under the environments! laws, However the Sth reospendent has abtained Terms af Reference (ToR} under violation sage as per MoE Pa CC OM Mo. 3-SO/2017-1A. Ti CPs dated 36.65.2018, B- 1203 MAW 2618-TA TOM dated 18.455. 2018 and 21-FOS/2G 7 S- LAT dated 82.11 0018.
S &.
SS 2 Wohoethene tkee <ethe fe EP Coed Kar Rt is ee ndtwettioag exsderaderg an Wie tio m aa _ tee envicnonrsaental faves without obisaining maecessary clean rmcetpoerrmgestar, RP so sbrrwe weikeas these cee Goda thea samc, The Oth respendent submitted that they have perfermcd mining without price ander ELA Notification, 2006 and accerdingly they submitted the proposal for Perms of Refersnes ander Vichation casa as poo MPOR PCI Motiticarion, AAS paar Tok thicy bave comdacoed tne public bearing on GS .2009 2022 bm thor preemies af Tetatriot Clodkeseter aod the EEA and EMTP reports averse mglao submited. "Mirey base mesic the rnistineg wl Boa.
3. What is the quantity af thea rnainerai extracted by daing sweokh illegal xrebetogw., what bx the mature of getion taken Joby the amthorities swhoem suwok. wviolatiass moe broagit to thoir metioc.
As 2 part of considering the application submitted ty the Gth responders kar Retiing Mor uader viesation Category, the Ministry of Environment Forest soo! (fiaavave bange bas issued a terter dated 25.11.2020 te the state Gevernreenr to take action aemnhnst Hie proponent wumder Section 19 of BP Act LOSG and to subroit ube regpeeart.
uring fhe visit. the joint Gamadittice merticed thar there are 13 xeytireiew pits. mrcct TORS LE MOINES averce alee taken. "ocoordingly the cafewlation for Gorncdlinng out the quantity oof smocrais extracted withowsr vatiel HC is in progress.
4. "Whether aay damage is caused to the environment on account of the mining dene by the GU respondent wait, and if So. assess the emt ibixcgeost ? x 7 tmrmagme cmusecd te thre ronnmimt inechbeding fhe emwironmental componsation te be cecoweredd True theexa, apart Pres sugmesting recommendations for restauratian tex aminge osttscel ta the rw Eron mer €.
Wide Letuer INO. F No 23-22 P/O LSA ERIOV's dated S.O2 2020 the Ministry of Environment Poreat and Climate Change has issued Tok under violation oase aru 21 rected fo Boers the oe Savamnneatal altethte hy a lebondtary notified nider EP Aet 1986 or MALE accredited faby oe dy AP ERR seancts doy cc & ' < a .
FANT OE 8B AT CRONE wanking ie the Held af environment. 3 is aise directed fa prepare a SeseRtae plan and fe piepars a natal ard SONIDIUAHLY tugmentation plan Sammapanding ta the sealagical damages.
Vhs Joint commiltes is alsy direwted the TNECH and Ground Water Department £6 wallest vowtor and sadf de apaiysie and te submit the analysis report i the coravaltfes for accessing the damage caused te the environment an account af the legal mining, Upon thea RNS a cote a . s bay ' MAS PeRepe Gf Analysis napart the eommidee will calculate the environmenial ABSaNOS to he ntvavered trem them, apart from suggesting recommendations for Tesora Ror damage omieed to the eavdronment.
S Whether the 8th respondent had abtained necewnry permissien for extracting grouad water for thelr industrial purpase and if not, whai is the action taken ineiading the impeatiion of compensation for unauthorized drawl of ground water by the Sth respondent.
They have obtained permission from Water Resoures Department for extracting grand eater, ee AW
6. We have.
rr ag Engineers Pw fate of Géolegy :
aa < ~ wee < and ipducttte S Lindt 2 antl he Ae their roperty3wentd "< "WI af = obtainin necessa permission. They have 'not used water for mining purpose, but they have used the same for their industrial, domestic as well as for afforstation purpose. They have also calculated an amount of Rs. 1,11,46,124/- (Rupees One Crore Eleven Lakhs Forty Six Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Four Only) as compensation for drawl of ground water in the over exploited area.22
7. It is quite unfortunate that they have not filed an independent report. We have deprecated the practice of producing the internal communication as report. They are expected to file the report in the proper form through their standing counsel. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for Public Works Department (PWD) and Water Resources Department (WRD) submitted that he will instruct their clients to file a oper report as directed by this Tribunal. epartment submitted that if some file Ave Committee report as < @ well own, nature o AWS A ar , eu Chennai wanted six aks: time tof e > the Joint Committee report.
ind Mining, Guindy, Once the inspection has already | been 1 completed, what is the necessity for seeking such a long time for filing the report and we are yet to understand the reason for delay in filing the report.
11. The committee is directed to submit the report to this Tribunal on or before 02.02.2022 by e-filing in the form of searchable PDF/OCR 23 Supportable PDF and not in the form of Image PDF along with necessary hard copies to be produced as per rules.
12. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the members of the committee as well as the official respondents immediately through e-mail, so as to enable them to comply with the direction. The other respondents who have not filed their statements are directed to file their statements.and complete the pleadings before the next hearing date.
13. For completion of plead :
24