Himachal Pradesh High Court
Gajendra Rawat vs . Union Of India & Others. on 1 June, 2023
Bench: Mamidanna Satya Ratna Sri Ramachandra Rao, Ajay Mohan Goel
Gajendra Rawat Vs. Union of India & others.
.
CWP No. 2516 of 2021 01.06.2023 Present: Mr. Devashish, Advocate vice Mr. Ravi Tanta, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Balram Sharma, DSGI, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Mr. Varun Chandel, Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocates General, Mr. Gautam Sood and Mr. Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocates General, for the respondents-State.
Dr. Sujata Sirkeck, Law Officer, O/o Environment Science & Technology, is present in person. De-link from CWPIL No. 19 of 2017.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
3. In this writ petition, issue regarding issuance of mining lease licenses to stone crusher units and other projects in eco- sensitive areas such as wetland and national parks, is sought to be raised.
4. Reliance is also placed on order dated 12.01.2017 passed in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 66 of 2014 alongwith Writ Petition (PIL) No. 41 of 2015, decided by the High Court of Uttrakhand at Nainital, directing certain measures to be taken with regard to projects of this nature being operated within 10 kilometers within the periphery of wetlands and national parks.
5. It is not in dispute that several mining licences have been granted by the State of Himachal Pradesh in certain areas which are alleged to be very close to wetlands and national parks.
6. We direct the learned Counsel appearing for the State of Himachal Pradesh to place on record details of such mining licences/stone crusher units and the locations where such licences are ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2023 20:31:09 :::CIS allowed to be operated and the proximity of the said operations to the wetland/national parks on the next date of hearing.
.
7. More importantly, there appears to be also an issue about the demarcation of the inter-state boundary between the States of Uttrakhand and Himachal Pradesh, and it is being contended that certain persons holding mining licences granted by the Himachal Pradesh Government are operating within the 10 kilometers radius of wetlands and national parks which fall within the territory of Uttrakhand.
8. In these circumstances, we deem it appropriate to direct the 1st respondent to cause a survey of such areas where there is a dispute as to the location of the mining areas, after giving notices to both States, through an Agency such as Survey of India, so that there is proper demarcation on the ground, and the appropriate jurisdictional authority can take effective steps for protection of these wetlands and national parks. Such survey be undertaken with the consent of the Government of Uttrakhand on a date convenient to the representatives of the both States of Uttrakhand and Himachal Pradesh within eight weeks.
9. List on 08.08.2023.
10. Rejoinder, if any, be filed by the petitioner to the replies filed by the respondents.
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao) Chief Justice.
June 01, 2023 (Ajay Mohan Goel)
(hemlata) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2023 20:31:09 :::CIS
.
::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2023 20:31:09 :::CIS