National Green Tribunal
Democratic Traditional Fishers ... vs Ministry Of Environment Forest And ... on 27 September, 2022
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan, Satyagopal Korlapati
Item No. 03 Court No. 1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 187of 2020(SZ)
(Through video conference)
IN THE MATTER OF:
1. DEMOCRATIC TRADITIONAL FISHERS WORKERS FORUM (DTFWF)
Through its General Secretary,
Shri D Pal, Aged about 52 years, S/o S.R. Pal,
R/o Saikrishna Nagar, near Sambhunagar Flyover,
Alcot Gardens, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District
Andhra Pradesh-533101.
2. SHRI DOMA ADINARAYANA
Aged about 62 years,
S/o Shri Venkana,
R/o Vasalarevu village, H/o Kota,
K Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh-533306
...Applicant(s)
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change,
Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jor Bagh Road,
New Delhi-110003.
...Respondent(s)
Date of Judgment: 27.09.2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Mr. Ritwick Dutta
For Respondent(s): Mr. G.M. Syed Nurullah Sheriff for R1
Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R2 to R8
ORDER
Judgment pronounced through Video Conference. The original application is disposed of with directions vide separate Judgment. Pending interlocutory application, if any, shall stands disposed of.
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M.
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, E.M.
O.A. No. 187/2020(SZ)
27th September 2022. AD
1
Item No. 03 Court No.1:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No.187 of 2020(SZ)
(Through video conference)
IN THE MATTER OF:
1. DEMOCRATIC TRADITIONAL FISHERS WORKERS FORUM (DTFWF) Through its General Secretary, Shri D Pal, Aged about 52 years, S/o S.R. Pal, R/o Saikrishna Nagar, near Sambhunagar Flyover, Alcot Gardens, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District Andhra Pradesh-533101.
2. SHRI DOMA ADINARAYANA Aged about 62 years, S/o Shri Venkana, R/o Vasalarevu village, H/o Kota, K Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh-533306 ...Applicant(s) Versus
1. UNION OF INDIA Through its Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jor Bagh Road, New Delhi-110003.
2. STATE OF ANDRA PRADESH Through its Chief Secretary, Building No. 1, 1st Floor, Interim Government Complex, AP Secretariat Office, Velagapudi, Andhra Pradesh-522503
3. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY Through its Member Secretary, A-3, Prayauaraana Bhavan, Industrial Estate Sanath Nagar, Moosapet, Hyderabad-500018 2
4. ANDHRA PRADESH MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Through its Chairman, R/o 294/1D,100 Ft. Road, Kanuru Vilage, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawanda, Andhra Pradesh-521137
5. WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH Through its Secretary, D.No.: 14-7-239, 3rd Floor, Vyshya Bhavan, Namboori Gopal Rao Street, Hanuman Pet, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh-520003
6. ANDHRA PRADESH COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY Through its Member Secretary, D.No. 33-26-14 D/2, Near Sunrise Hospital, Pushpa Hotel Centre, Chalamvari Street, Kasturibaipet, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh-520010
7. ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD Through its Member Secretary, D.No. 33-26-14 D/2, Near Sunrise Hospital, Pushpa Hotel Centre, Chalamalavari Street, Kasturibaipet, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh-520010
8. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT District Collectorate Office, Rama Rao Peta, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh-533001 ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s): Mr. Ritwick Dutta For Respondent(s): Mr. G.M. Syed Nurullah Sheriff for R1 Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R2 to R8 Judgment Reserved on: 26th August 2022.
Judgment Pronounced on: 27th September 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER Whether the Judgment is allowed to be published on the Internet - Yes Whether the Judgment is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter - Yes.3
JUDGEMENT Delivered by Justice K. Ramakrishnan, Judicial Member
1. The grievance in this application is regarding the illegal sand mining that was being carried out in the riverbed of Godavari River along East Godavari District(now in Kakinada District) in State of Andhra Pradesh.
2. Applicant No. 1 is a Fisher's Unions working for the rights and welfare of the fishermen in Andhra Pradesh and the 2nd Applicant is a fisherman who earns his livelihood by carrying on traditional fishing in Kotipalli area in river Godavari and he is the present President of the Applicant No.1 association.
3. In clear violation of Statutory Environment Law in the form of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification, 2019 where by sand mining was prohibited in Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), illegal sand mining was being carried out in Kotipalli Village East Godavari District (Now in Kakinada District) and that area falls within Coastal Regulation Zone as delineated by Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority.
4. The Coastal Regulation Zone Notification was enacted for the purpose of protecting the fishermen community to ensure their security for their livelihood and other local communities living in the coastal areas, to conserve and to protect coastal stretches, its unique environment and its marine area and to promote development through sustainable manner based on scientific principles taking into account the dangers of natural hazards in the coastal areas, sea level rise due to global warming etc.,
5. As per Paragraph 4 of the CRZ Notification, 2019 prohibits certain activities which include sand mining.
6. Since the illegal sand mining was carried out by persons unknown to the applicants, they were not able to implead them in the application. A makeshift ramp/bridge was made on Godavari riverbed which was used for illegal sand mining evidenced by Annexure -1 photograph.4
7. The area falls in CRZ IV-B region as per Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019 and it is clearly visible from the Coastal Zone Management Plan notified by the State of Andhra Pradesh. The screenshot of the Google Earth map relating to the disputed area was produced as Annexure-2 and the map of the location in the Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Plan was produced as Annexure-3.
8. The Copy of the CRZ Notification, 2019 was produced as Annexure-4.
Diverting the water course and impedes the natural flow of river is prohibited under Section 24 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and it is punishable under 43 of the said Act.
9. On account of the construction of the makeshift bridge/ramp has affected the free flow of the water in Godavari River in turn results in inundation and flood in that area.
10. "The Andhra Pradesh New Sand Mining Policy, 2019" also prohibits mechanised mining and it directs, for river and streams, the "excavation of sand shall be manual and no mechanical means be allowed for excavation".
11. Apart from Kotipalli Village, such illegal activities were being carried on in Dowleswaram Dam reservoir near Rajahmundry and the geotagged photographs showing the illegal sand mining being carried with the use of suction pumps in Dowleswaram dam was produced as Annexure-5.
12. No clearance was obtained from the Coastal Zone Management Plan authorities or no clearance was obtained from the Andhra Pradesh State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority and the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MOEF&CC) as required under the CRZ notification and EIA Notification respectively. The applicant had produced Annexure-6 the copy of the Andhra Pradesh Sand Mining Policy, 2019 by which user of mechanise mining was prohibited.
13. 18000 fishermen are depending on the fish populations in that area and this has affected the livelihood of the people.
514. Scientific research that has been done in that area by different authorities titled as "Impacts of riverine sand mining on freshwater ecosystems "and it was further mentioned to show the impact of unscientific sand mining on river beds that rearrangement of benthic sediments during mining can hamper fish reproduction by decreasing the stability of the sediment deposits and impacting embryos sheltering within them. Some of the studies titled "Impacts of riverine sand mining on freshwater ecosystem"
relied on by the applicant was produced as Annexure-7.
15. Annexure-8 representations were made to the authorities on 21.04.2020 by the 1st applicant association but no action was taken in this regard. That prompted the applicant to file this application seeking the following reliefs:
(i) Direct the Respondent authorities to ensure that all sand mining activities at Kotipalli village within the Coastal Regulation Zone are stopped immediately;
(ii) Direct the Respondent authorities to ensure that the makeshift bridge/ramp that has been constructed on the riverbed of the Godavari River is removed immediately and environmental restoration of the region is carried out;
(iii) Direct the Respondent authorities to ensure that the sand mining through heavy machinery (suction pumps) that is being carried out at the Dowleswaram dam reservoir near Rajahmundry is stopped immediately;
(iv) Direct the Respondent No.3, the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, to regularly monitor the Godavari river in the East Godavari District (Now in Kakinada District) to ensure that no illegal sand mining through the use of heavy machinery is carried out;
(v) Direct the Respondent No.2, the State of Andhra Pradesh to constitute the district level committee (as per Para 9(iii) of the CRZ Notification, 2019) under the Chairmanship of the District Magistrate concerned comprising at least three representatives of local traditional; coastal communities including from fishers, to ensure the prevention of illegal sand mining activities within the coastal regulation zone;6
(vi) Pass any other order that this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem to fit and proper in for the facts and circumstances of the present case.
16. The 4th respondent filed counter affidavit contending as follows:
They denied most of the allegations made against them in the application. They have further reiterated the formation of the Joint Committee by this Tribunal and inspection and finding of the Joint Committee. It was further mentioned that as per the committee report which inspected the area in Kotipalli village mentioned that the ramp was constructed on the river bed which was obstructing the flow of river and it was constructed long ago and it was washed away due to heavy rains and the ramp was being used as village road and the ramp was not used for illegal sand mining as alleged. It was also mentioned in the report that as per the google satellite images, a ramp was in existence in the said location earlier. They have also noted the observations made by the Joint Committee on the basis of the satellite images and physical verifications and conclusions as follows:
(i) The alleged ramp was present since, 2016 and the Villagers are also informed that the ramp is used as Village Road.
There is no evidence for establishing that the Ramp was used for illegal sand mining activities.
(ii) Presently, at Kotipalli near to the alleged ramp, 2km length Railway Bridge from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram was under
construction on the waterway.
(iii) Out of which for a length of 700m flow was obstructed.
(iv) It was informed that the sand used in the construction of Railway Bridge is excess sand available while digging footage for pillars in the river bed only and the bridge may be completed by 2023.
(v) The photos of Heavy Vehicles plying on the river bed and on flood plains for sand mining is not true.
(vi) The C&D waste generated during construction activity are dumped near the river itself.
(vii) More than 300 workers are involved in the construction activity.7
17. The construction of Railway Bridge from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram is a National Project for the public purpose. The obstruction at 700 mts in Godavari River is purely temporary construction and tentative for the sake of construction of Railway Bridge and it is not obstructing the natural flow of river. After completion of the Bridge work, it will be completely removed. It cannot affect the Environment as it is an only time being for construction of Bridge.
18. As regards the allegations in paragraphs 17 to 22 of the application in respect of Dowleshwaram Dam Reservoir, Rajamahendravaram, the Joint Committee has observed as follows:
The Water Resource Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh vide letter dated 12.01.2016 had proposed to take de-siltation in Bridgelanka and Kethavanilanka located near to Dowlaiswaram barrage to enhance the storage capacity. However, the irrigation department has not scientifically assessed the loss in storage capacity and by means of de- siltation how much storage can be recovered. The committee is of the opinion that since Godavari is a Vth order stream, large quantity of siltation is likely to occur over a period of time but whenever de-siltation activity is taken up it is essential to scientifically ascertain the quantity of silt deposits which is lacking in the present case. Further, the sediment yield of river Godavari in the region is also not ascertained. The Water Resource Department, Revenue Department and Department of Mines and Geology have identified following three de-siltation points near to Dowlaiswaram barrage.
(i) Venkatanagaram sand ramp in Rajamahendravaram Rural (M)@Km.
15.9 KM of Akhanda Godavari Left Bank.
(ii) Bridgelanka (Kotilingala sand ramps) in Rajamahendravaram Rural(M) @Km.11.4 KM of Akhanda Godavari Left Bank.
(iii) Ketavani Lanka (Gayatri sand ramps) in Rajamahendravaram Rural(M) of Akhanda Godavari Left Bank.
The de-siltation reaches have been operating since 2016 as per the directions of the District Level Sand Committee. The quantity of 2,00,000 cum of excavation of Sand is permitted from each de-siltation point. The Water Resource Department has proposed to carryout Bathymetric Survey to assess de-siltation quantity in the River Godavari. Sand is extracting manually through Boats (most of them Boatmen and Fishermen). No machinery is using for extraction of sand in the de- siltation points.
Operations are carrying out since 2016 onwards by renewing the permission for de-siltation of sand. Present, permissions were accorded on 27.11.2020 by the Water Resource Department. The average quantity of 475 Tons extracting per day. From the date of permission, a quantity of 17,100 Tons of sand was extracted from these de-siltation points. Geo-coordinates were fixed for each de-siltation area by the Water Resource Department for the de-siltation reaches which are submerged in water and partly sub-merged in water.
As a routine River maintenance activity, de-siltation is being carried out without affecting the River ecology. The sand coming from the de-siltation is used both for Government schemes as well as commercial purposes as leaving it on the River Bank causes re-deposition in the River. The de-siltation sand reaches are operating without Environmental Clearance from SEIAA. However, the State has considered it as for 8 Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Notification Dt 15.01.2016, S.O.141 (E), Appendix-IX which exempt the De-Silting in the River from requirement of prior Environment Clearance and proceeded. Water Resource Department shall ensure that sand reaches are operated in compliance of AP Sand Mining Policy, 2019 and sustainable sand mining guidelines issued by MoEF&CC.
19. The committee did not observe any environmental impact or damage to stretches near the de-siltation points in Dowleshwaram and as such the allegations are not correct. They have also given para wise reply more or less reiterating the contentions raised in the earlier paragraphs for each one of the grounds raised by the applicant in the application. They prayed for accepting their contention and dismissal of the application.
20. The 7th respondent filed counter affidavit contending as follows:
(i) As per G.O. M.S 20 dated 04.09.2019, the Government introduced "New Sand Policy", 2019, to effectively regulate the extraction transportation and disposal of river sand and decided to undertake sand quarrying and supply of sand to the public by appointing M/S. APMDC Limited as an agent to operate on behalf of the Government.
(ii) They denied the other allegations made in the application and also reiterated the appointment of the Joint Committee and direction issued to submit the report. They prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
21. The District Collector Kakinada who is the 8th Respondent had adopted the counter filed by the 7th respondent and filed a memo to that effect.
22. The 3rd respondent filed detailed counter affidavit contending as follows:
The application is not maintainable as against them. As per the records available from the Andhra Pradesh State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority and it has granted Environmental Clearance (EC) for the sand reach located in Survey Nos. 82, 84,107 of Kotipalli village, K. Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District for mining of sand in an extent of 4.98 Ha on 06.08.2020 with validity period of 1 year from the date of issue stipulating certain conditions to be complied with. It is not known as to whether the area mentioned by the applicant related to area covered by a same. If there is any violation of the Environment Clearance conditions, then Andhra 9 Pradesh Pollution Control Board will be directed to assess the environmental compensation for the violations.
23. In the absence of monitoring mechanisms, the monitoring of enforcement of environmental clearance conditions shall be done by the Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and the agency nominated by the Ministry as per the Notification dt.15.01.2016, S.O.143(E) and all the Environmental Clearance conditions will be monitored by the concerned State Pollution Control Board as per the G.O.M.S.No.120, dt.01.11.2018 evidenced by Annexure 1&2 produced along with counter statement. The Mining Department is the competent authority for taking action against illegal mining activity. They prayed for accepting their contention, exempt them from further appearance unless it is so specifically needed for the purpose of the case as directed by this Tribunal and pass appropriate orders.
24. As per order dated 29.09.2020, when the matter came up for admission it was brought to our notice that there is another case pending before this Tribunal as O.A. No. 87 of 2020 (Dasu Manikantaiah Vs Union of India and others) where this Tribunal had constituted a committee to go into the question and submit a report in respect of allegation of illegal mining in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh.
25. Since the area in that case was different, this Tribunal reconstituted the committee with following members:
a. The Senior Officer from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF & CC), Regional Office, Chennai, b. A Senior Scientist from State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), State of Andhra Pradesh, c. Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, East Godavari District, d. A Senior Officer from Central Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, Chennai and e. The District Collector, East Godavari District and the committee was directed to go into the question regarding the allegations made in the application and submit a factual as well as action taken report.10
26. If there is any violation found, the committee was also directed to ascertain as to whether any Environmental Clearance was required as provided under EIA Notification, 2006 for the activities carried out in that area and as per directions of the Hon'ble Court in (Deepak Kumar Vs State of Haryana reported in (2012) 4 SCC 629) and if there is any violation found, they were directed to assess the Environmental compensation as well.
27. The committee was also directed to go into the question as to what is the nature of activities that is being done by the user agency, whether they are involved only in dredging, for the purpose of cleaning the riverbed, so as to enable the free flow of water, if in the guise of dredging, whether they were doing sand mining without obtaining necessary clearance and how the sand is being dealt with, whether it has been used for commercial purpose or for spreading the same in the area where replenishment of sand is required under the Sustainable Sand Mining Policy of Central Government. They were also directed to ascertain the quantity of sand that is being extracted illegally by the user agency for the purpose of assessing environmental compensation.
28. The committee was also directed to ascertain as to whether the area falls within the Coastal Regulation Zone where sand mining was prohibited.
29. The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), Regional Office, Chennai was designated as the nodal agency for co- ordination and for providing necessary logistics for this purpose.
30. The matter was taken up for consideration on 19.03.2021, and on that day this Tribunal considered the report submitted by the Joint Committee dated nil e-filed on 16.03.2021 extracted in Para (3) of the order which reads as follows:
Preamble Hon‟ble NGT (SZ) vide order dated 29.09.2020 in Application No. 187 of 2020 constituted a Joint Committee comprising of (1) Senior Officer of MoEF&CC, Regional Office, Chennai a Senior Officer from Central Pollution Control Board, Regional office, Chennai (3) a Senior Scientist from State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), State of Andhra Pradesh (4) Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, East Godavari District and (5), the District Collector, East Godavari District to inspect the area in question regarding the allegation made in the application and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found. The complaint was about sand mining being carried out in two locations i.e., 1. Kotipalli Village and 2.Dowleswaram Dam 11 Reservoir near Rajahmundry. The committee is directed to ascertain as to whether any environmental clearance is required as provided under EIA Notification, 2006 and as directions of the Hon‟ble Apex Court and if there is any violation, they are directed to assess the environmental compensation as well. The Committee is also directed to go into the question as to what is the nature of activities that being done by the user agency, whether they are involved only in dredging for the purpose of cleaning the river bed, so as to enable the free flow of water or in the guise of dredging they are doing sand mining without obtaining necessary clearance and how the sand is being dealt with whether it has been used for commercial purpose or for spreading the same in the area where replenishment of sand is required under the Sustainable Sand Mining Policy 2019. The committee is also directed to ascertain the quantity of sand that being extracted illegally by the user agency for the purpose of assessing environmental compensation. The committee is also directed to ascertain as to whether the area falls within the Coastal Regulation Zone where sand mining is prohibited. Copy of the Hon‟ble NGT order is enclosed as Annexure-I. Composition of the Committee In compliance to Hon‟ble NGT order dated 21.09.2020, the committee comprising offollowing members was composed: Shri D.Muralidhar Reddy, IAS District Collector, East Godavari Smt. Mahima T, Scientist-D, Central Pollution Control Board, Regional Directorate-Chennai Dr. C. Palpandi, Scientist „C‟, Integrated Regional Office, Ministry of EnvironmentForest and Climate Change, Chennai Shri Kumar, Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Rajamehendravaram Shri Murali Krishna Reddy, Member, SEIAA, Andhra Pradesh The committee visited the area on 10-12-2020. During the visit, the representatives from the Revenue Department of State of Andhra Pradesh and Government of Puducherry participated in the visit. Scope of Study of the Committee The committee to look into the matter and find out the following:
To inspect the Kotipalli Village & Dowleswaram Dam reservoir near Rajahmundry To ascertain the nature of activities taking place in river bed so as to enable the free flow of water To ascertain whether in the guise of dredging they are doing sand mining without obtaining necessary clearance To find out how the sand is being dealt with whether it has been used for commercial purpose or for spreading the same in the area where replenishment of sand is required under the Sustainable Sand Mining Policy To ascertain the quantity of sand illegally mined. Prevailing Sand Mining Policy, 2019 in Andhra Pradesh The Government of Andhra Pradesh has introduced New Sand Mining Policy, 2019 with effect from 04-09-2019. Salient features of new sand mining policy are as follows:
Sand excavation in river streams of I, II & III order will be regulated by the District Administration for consumption within the district for local domestic needs and Government sponsored weaker section housing schemes. The excavation shall be manual and no mechanical means be allowed for excavation. Sand sourced from the streams of I, II & III order shall be transported to nearest specified stockyards for subsequent disposal by M/s APMDC Ltd., to the end consumers. Sand should be 4 made available for Government sponsored weaker section housing schemes free of cost duly paying applicable charges.
Sand may be sourced from streams of I, II, and III order for local needs by bullock carts. In such cases the Tahsildar of the mandal concerned shall issue a permit on payment of sale price per ton, as fixed by the Government.
Sand extraction in river streams of IV, V and higher order will be permitted subject to Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules 12 (APMMC), 1966, Environment Protection Act, Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) notification, 2006 issued by Ministry of Environment Forest & Climate Change and the Rules made there under and all applicable Rules &b Regulations in vogue.
The District Collector shall obtain statutory Clearances such as Approved Mining Plan, Environmental Clearance, Consent for Establishment and Consent for Operation from the competent authorities prior to commencement of operations and handover the sand reaches to M/s APMDC Ltd for operations.
M/s APMDC Ltd., shall Put in place an online system for registration of end consumers and transporters, receipt of orders directly from the end consumers, collection of payments and remittance to the treasury account of the State government online and maintenance of stockyards, disposal of sand from the stockyards and real time tracking of sandcarrying vehicles. Allot the work of sand extraction, loading and transportation of sand to stockyard, ramp maintenance, loading of sand to dispatch vehicles at the stockyard through a competitive reverse tendering process. Install weigh bridges at the stockyards and CCTV cameras at sand reaches and stockyards to monitor sand operations and vehicular movement. Findings of the committee at Dowleswaram Barrage As per the allegations made in the complaint, the committee visited Dowleswaram barrage in the early hours of 10.12.2020 and discussed with concerned departments.
Observations of the committee with respect to sand mining at Dowleswaram barrage:
Water Resource Department, Govt of A.P vide letter dated 12.1.2016 (Copy enclosed as Annexure-II) had proposed to take desiltation in bridge lanka and kethavaralanka located near to Dowleswaram barrage to enhance the storage capacity. But however, the Irrigation department has not scientifically assessed the loss in storage capacity and by means of desiltation how much storage can be recovered. The committee is of the opinion that since Godavari is a V 5 order stream, large quantity of siltation is likely to occur over a period of time but whenever desiltation activity is taken up it is essential to scientifically ascertain the quantity of silt deposits which is lacking in the present case. Further the sediment yield of river Godavari in the region is also not ascertained.
Water Resource Department, Revenue Department and Department of Mines and Geology have identified following three sand reaches near to Dowleswaram barrage (Copy of the renewal of desiltation points is enclosedas Annexure-III):
Venkatanagaram sand ramp in Rajamahendravaram Rural (M) @Km.15.9 KM ofakhanda Godavari Left Bank Bridgelanka (Kotilingala sand ramps) in in Rajamahendravaram Rural @Km.11.4 KM of akhanda Godavari Left Bank Ketavani Lanka (Gayatri sand ramps) in in Rajamahendravaram Rural of akhanda Godavari Left Bank It was reported by M/s APMDC that since 2016 these three reaches are in operation. District level sand committee (DLSC) has approved the operationof the sand reaches.
The total quantity of sand permitted for excavation in each reach is 2,00,000 m3 in an area of approximately 10 hectares. As per WALTA Rules only in case the depth of siltation is more than 8m, desiltation can be carried out upto maximum depth of 3m. In the above mentioned three reaches in Dowleswaram barrage sand excavation is permitted upto a depth of 2.5m. Without assessing the depth of silt deposited in the reaches, sand extraction is permitted upto a depth of 2.5m. It is reported that WRD has proposed to carry out Bathymetric survey to assess the siltation quantity in River Godavari.
Sand is extracted manually through boats (most of them boatmen & fishermen).
It was reported that the reaches are operational since 2016 onwards by renewing the permission for sand extraction. Currently, the renewal for 13 sand extraction was accorded by WRD on 27.11.2020 and reported that operation resumed from November 28, 2020 and around 350- 600 Tonnes of sand is extracted per day (average 475 tonnes per day). Based on the information provided by M/s APMDC around 5700tonnes of sand is extracted in each reach upto December 10, 2020 (till the date of committee inspection). APMDC has fixed Cost of sand @ Rs. 525/tonne for sand extracted from these three reaches. The total quantity of sand extracted in these three reaches (till December 10, 2020 upto committee inspection) is 17,100 6 tonnes and revenue generated by these three reaches is Rs.89,77,500/-.
Sand extraction is carried out manually by the boatmen. No machinery is used for sand extraction. The sand is transported from the river bed in trucks. M/s APMDC shall direct the contractor that only tractors shall ply on river bed for transportation of sand. Movement of heavy machineries shall not be permitted in the river bed. For every reach Water Resource department has fixed the boundary(geocoordinates) while according permission for sand extraction but there is no physical demarcation of boundaries in the sand reaches. Bridge lanka reach is submerged in water, Kotilingava reach and ketavanilanka reaches are partly submerged in water and partly exposed. Further M/s APMDC is not monitoring as to whether the sand extraction is carried within the boundaries specified by WRD.
a) No log books are maintained on quantity of sand extracted and since baseline data on thickness of silt deposits is available the committee could not ascertain the total quantity of sand extracted.
b) CCTV is installed in the river bed where transportation of sand is taking place.
c) Production and dispatch registers are not maintained in the field.
Register is maintained on no. of trucks used for transportation of the sand.
d) There are no weigh bridges in the reaches.
e) As per Guidelines on Sustainable Sand mining published by Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, for mining of minor minerals (sand is a minor mineral) falling under category „B2‟ for less than or equal to five hectares, permission has to be obtained by "District Environment Impact Assessment Authority" (DEIAA) and for more than five hectares permission/ Clearance has to be obtained by SEIAA. The area of eachsand reaches is around 10 hectares and are operating without Environmental Clearance.
Findings of the committee with respect to sand mining at Kotipalli village
1. It was alleged in the application that illegal sand mining is taking place in Kotippali village and ramp is constructed on the river bed which is obstructing the flow of river. The committee visited kotipalli village and the locations specified in the application. It was observed that presently at the geo-coordinates specified in the complaint (16°41'50.3"N 82°02'49.2"E)there is no ramp. The committee verified the historical satellite images and observed that ramp was existing in the said location. On enquiring with villagers, it was informed that the ramp washed away due to heavy rains. From the historical satellite images it is understood that the alleged ramp is present since 2016.The villagers also informed that the ramp was used as a village road. Hence it cannot be established that the ramp was used for illegal sand mining activities. Presently at Kotipalli near to alleged ramp, 2 Km length Railway bridge from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram is under construction on the waterway out of which for a length of 700m flow is obstructed. The sand required for the construction is extracted from the river utilized. It was informed that the bridge may be completed by 2023.
The photos of heavy machinery and JCB included in the application are used for construction of Railway Bridge and temporary ramp as part of bridge construction.
Heavy machinery are plying on the river bed and on flood banks. The C&D waste generated during construction activity are dumped near the river itself.
14More than 300 workers are involved in the construction activity but there are noproper sanitation facilities for the workers. Conclusions of the committee The committee is of the view that Water Resource Department is carrying out sand extraction in River Godavari without scientifically assessing the quantity of silt deposits. Since the quantity of silt deposited and loss in storage capacity is not ascertained by Water Resource Department, it cannot be treated as desiltation andhas to be considered as mining. Further the sand extracted is used both for Government schemes and as well for commercial purposes.
Water Resource Department have permitted three sand reaches namely Venkatanagaram sand reach, bridge lanka and ketavanilanka sand reach which are located near Dowleswaram barrage. Sand is extracted in all the three reaches manually through boats. The sand so extracted is brought to the bank and then loaded into trucks. In these three reaches heavy machinery is not used for sand extraction but heavy vehicles are plying on the river bed for sand transportation. Proper log books are not maintained on the quantity of sand extracted.
It was reported that the reaches are operational since 2016 onwards by renewing the permission for sand extraction. Currently, the renewal for sand extraction was accorded by WRD on 27.11.2020 and reported that operation resumed from November 28, 2020 and around 350- 600 Tonnes of sand is extracted per day (average 475 tonnes per day). Based on the information provided by M/s APMDC around 5700 tonnes of sand is extracted in each reach up to December 10, 2020 (till the date of committee inspection). APMDC has fixed Cost of sand @ Rs. 375 per tonne(up to October 2}th 2020 ); and Rs. 525/tonne (October 21st 2020 onwards) for sand extracted from these three reaches. The total quantity of sand extracted in these three reaches (till December 10, 2020 up to committee inspection) is 17,100 tonnes and revenue generated by these three reaches is Rs. 89,77,500/-.
Sand extraction in Venkatanagaram sand reach, bridge lanka and ketavanilanka is taking place upto a depth of 2.5m in an area of more than 10 hectares in each reach. As per Guidelines on Sustainable Sand mining published by Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, for mining of minor minerals (sand is a minor mineral) falling under category 'B2' for less than or equal to five hectares, permission has to be obtained by "District Environment Impact Assessment Authority"
(DEIAA) and for more than five hectares permission/ Clearance has to be obtained by SEIAA. The area of each sand reach is around l0 8 hectares and are operating without Environmental Clearance from SEIAA.
However, the State has considered it as for the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Notification Dt 15.01.2016, S.O. l4l(E), Appendix-IX which exempt the De-silting in the River from requirement of prior Environment Clearance and proceeded.
Water Resource Department shall ensure that sand reaches are operated in compliance of AP sand mining policy, 2019 and sustainable sand mining guidelines issued by MOEF& CC. The committee did not observe any environmental impacts or damage to structures near to the sand reaches in Dowleswaram.
In Kotipalli (near to the alleged location mentioned in the application),2 Km length Railway bridge from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram is under construction on the waterway out of which for a length of 700m natural flow of river Godavari is obstructed.
31. Thereafter, this Tribunal had passed the following order:-
5. "It is seen from the report that there are certain violations and mandatory conditions have not been followed and the Railway Bridge from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram which is under construction on the water way by which the water flow for a length of 700 mts has been obstructed. The sand extracted from the river is being utilised for that purpose as well.15
6. It is also mentioned that there is presence of heavy machine and Construction and Demolition (C & D) waste are dumped in the river itself. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that they wanted to file objection to the committee report as well as they will take steps to implead new respondents, if any, required for the purpose of proper adjudication of the matter.
7. The learned counsel appearing for State respondent also submitted that they will come with the District survey report, if any, that has been prepared 9 before allowing the alleged desilting activities in this area.
8. The respondents are directed to submit their respective status and parties are directed to file their objections if any, to the committee report before this Tribunal on or before 27.04.2021 by e-filing in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF along with necessary hard copies to be produced as per rules.
9. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the official respondents immediately by e-mail, so as to enable them to comply with the direction of this Tribunal to file their independent response regarding the allegations made in the application and objections, if any, to the committee report before the next hearing date".
32. The applicant had filed their objection to the Joint Committee report wherein they had mentioned that the Joint Committee has not considered the directions issued by this Tribunal to be answered by the committee. Though, it was mentioned in the Joint Committee report that the area of each sand reach is around 10 hectares and operating without Environmental Clearance from the Andhra Pradesh State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, but they have not assessed the compensation for the illegal mining done without Environmental Clearance as it is not only violation of EIA Notification, 2006 but also the Sand Mining Policy of 2019, issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh. In spite of the fact that it was found that there was violation, they have not mentioned anything about the assessment of compensation. They have also not mentioned anything about the fact as to whether any coastal area falls in CRZ area under CRZ Notification.
33. It was also observed by the Joint Committee in Dowleshwaram reservoir area that the Water Resources Department is carrying out sand extraction in river Godavari without scientifically assessing the quantity of silt deposits. Since the quantity of silt deposited and loss in storage capacity is not ascertained by the Water Resources Department it cannot be treated as a de-siltation and has to be considered as Mining and the sand extracted was used by both for Government schemes and as well as commercial purpose and thereby it was nothing but illegal mining.
1634. It was mentioned in the report that the Water Resources Department have permitted three sand reaches namely Venkatanagaram sand reach, Bridge Lanka and Kethavanilanka sand reach which are located near Dowleswaram Barrage. The Sand was extracted in all three reaches manually through boats. The sand so extracted was brought to the bank and then loaded into trucks and no heavy machinery was used for this purpose. But they have mentioned that heavy vehicles were plying on the riverbed for sand transportation and they were not maintaining proper log books for that purpose.
35. The observation made by the Joint Committee that there was no impact on environment is not correct. Since, there is violation of EIA Notification committed and the illegal sand mining was done, it can only be presumed that there was environmental damage and compensation ought to have been sustained.
36. It was alleged in the report that there was deposit of construction wastes which affected for the length of 700mts and affected the natural flow of river Godavari but it's impact was not assessed. So they prayed for ignoring the report submitted by the Joint Committee and pass appropriate orders in this regard.
37. As directed by this Tribunal, the Department of Mining and Geology has produced the district survey report in respect of East Godavari District conducted during July 2021. The Action taken report dated Nil, filed and signed by Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Kakinada District, e-filed on 24.08.2022 reads as follows:
Action Taken Report in N.G.T Case No.187/2020 filed by Democratic Traditional Fishers Workers Forum (DTFWF) through its General Secretary Sri. D. Pal.
"ATR on conclusions of the Committee from point 01 to 05 in the committee report"
The committee is of the view that Water Resources Department is carrying out sand extractions in River Godavari without scientifically assessing the quantity of silt deposits. Since the quantity of silt deposited and loss in storage capacity is not ascertained by Water Resource Department it cannot be treated as de-siltation and has to be considered as Mining.
1. Water Resources department have permitted three sand reaches namely Venkatanagaram sand reach, Bridge Lanka and Kethavanilanka sand reach which are located near Dowleswaram 17 Barrage. Sand is extracted manually though boats and heavy machinery has not been used.
In this connection it is submitted that, the Water Resource Department has reported that upstream side of Dowleswaram barrage silt has been deposited and the same has to be de-silted through manually by Boatsmen societies as routine River maintenance activity it is being carried at without affecting the River ecology. Further heavy floods have occured in the River Akhanda Godavari every year and silt and sand have been re-depositing in huge quantity in upstream of Dowleswaram Barrage. As per the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Notification Dated 15.01.2016, S.O.No. 141(E) Appendix which exempt the De-Silting in the River from requirement of prior Environment clearance. Water Resource department shall ensure that sand reaches are operated incompliance of A.P sand mining policy 2019 and sustainable sand mining guidelines issued by MoEF& CC. Further it is submitted that the Water Resource Department has conducted Bathymetric survey to assess the quantity of sand in the Reservoir scientifically and assessed 91,56,621 cbm of sand available for De-Siltation from KM 3.000 to K.M 12.150 in Godavari River on upstream side of Dowleswaram Bridge.
The Government issued G.O Ms.No. 510, Dated 25.10.2021 of Water Resource Department for dredging sand in Godavarl River.
Further the Joint Committee has reported that total excavated quantity of Sand from 28.11.2020 to till date of inspection. (10.02.2020) is 17100 Mts from three areas through De-Siltation. As per the upgraded Sand Policy 2019 vide G.O.Ms.No. 25, Dt 16.04.2021 of Inds&CommDept M/s J.P Power Ventures has been selected as agency by the Government of A.P to operate the Sand reaches in the State of A.P from 12.05.2021. M/s J.P group can explore and employ Boatsmen Societies to extract sand under De- Siltation after receiving feasibility report from the Water Resources Department. In this regard necessary records have been maintaining by the Agency.
The Committee has not observed any environmental impacts or damage to structures near to the sand reached in Dowleswaram.
2. The Dy. Director of Mines and Geology, Kokinada and the Asst.Director of Mines and Gcology, Rajamahendravaram have inspected the site in Kotipali 2km length Railway bridge from Kotipali to Mukteswaram on 23.05.2022.
We have observed in the site of the area there is no 700 Mtrs ramp in the River Bed which is obstructing natural flow of River Godavari. Further thecontractor has completed the construction of pillars for Railway line from Kotipali to Mukteswaram in the River Bed and stopped the work. There is no Machinery and Workers. There are no Temporary Shelters to workers in the site. At present there is no construction work of Railway line.
It is submitted that the contractor may start Railway line bridge work In future and machinery and men may be deployed, but the same are temporary and shall be removed after completion of Railway bridge work. Construction of Railway Bridge Project is a National Project it is benefit to the public for transportation Finally it is submitted that pertaining to Kotipalli Bridge and Desiltation in Dowleswaram Barrage there are no violations and the Joint Committee has not observed any violations.
This is submitted for favour of information .
38. Heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant and the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.
1839. The Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant argued that the report of the Joint Committee, it is clear that there was illegal mining in the guise of de-silting and it was against the "Sand Mining Policy", 2019, of the State Government and also against the "Sustainable Sand Mining Policy" of 2016 and guidelines for monitoring and enforcement of the "Sustainable Sand Mining" of 2020 issued by MoEF & CC. It was also admitted that the alleged de-silting was done without conducting proper survey as required under the sand mining policy as well as, as per the directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in (Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana (2012) 4 SCC 629) case mentioned above.
40. Further, it was also observed that there was some obstruction caused due to the ramp/bridge constructed at two places namely Kotipalli area and Dowleshwaram reservoir area and construction waste were also seen dumped in that area which obstructs the flow of water. But inspite of all these things, no environmental compensation was assessed by the authorities. So they prayed for issuing appropriate directions in this regard.
41. On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh and its departments submitted that there was no illegal mining and they were strictly complying with the directions issued by this Tribunal in several matters relating to this namely sand mining and dredging/de-silting and the district survey report was prepared and it is only on that basis that the de-siltation is being carried out.
42. Necessary mechanism has been provided under the "Sand Mining Policy" to monitor the illegal sand mining and whenever it is being brought to their notice of such activities, severe action is being taken from their side including imposing penalty and the seizure of vehicles etc.,
43. Considered the pleadings submissions made by the Learned Counsel appearing of the parties and various reports submitted by the departments and the Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal.
1944. The points that arose for consideration are:
(i) Whether there was any illegal mining carried out in Kotipalli village and Dowleshwaram reservoir area along Godavari River in Kakinada District then East Godavari District as alleged in the application?
(ii) In the guise of de-silting/dredging, whether any illegal sand mining is being conducted in that area?
(iii) Whether there was any damage caused environment on account of such activities; if so what is the quantum of compensation payable?
(iv) What are all the further directions if any required to be issued applying the precautionary principle and sustainable development to protect environment?
(v) Reliefs and costs.
Points:
45. The grievance in this application that illegal sand mining is going on along Godavari riverbed in the erstwhile East Godavari District now in Kakinada District in violation of CRZ Notification and EIA Notification 2006, as amended from time to time.
46. Further the ramp/bridge constructed along the river in that area obstructs the natural flow of water and this was being used for illegal sand mining. Though, representations have made to the authorities, no action was taken in this regard. On the other hand, the State Departments had filed independent replies denying the allegations and also reiterated that they have got a responsibility to protect environment and whenever illegal mining is being done and it was brought to their notice they were taking appropriate action against those persons who were involved in such activities.
47. In Deepak Kumar vs. State of Haryana and Others (2012) 4 SCC 629, it was specifically mentioned that over exploitation of natural resources cannot be permitted and Environmental Clearance was insisted for sand mining irrespective of the area of mining lease. As earlier if it was less than 5 hectares, no Environmental Clearance was required.
2048. Further, the Apex Court also observed that whenever there are cluster mining areas, then a Regional Impact Assessment has to be conducted before granting Environmental Clearance and as far as possible the bifurcation of land into small pieces to avoid impact assessment is being done has to be viewed seriously by the department and only in exceptional circumstances such things can be allowed. It is on that basis, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) had issued the amended EIA Notification, 2006 by Amendment Notification of 2016, dated 15.01.2016.
49. On the basis of the directions issued by the Principal Bench, they have also issued guidelines for "Sustainable Sand Mining Policy", 2016 and subsequently, since the mechanism provided was not proper and adequate, as directed by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal in one of the cases, the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF & CC) had issued guidelines for Enforcement & Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, of 2020 and the Principal Bench had directed all the State Governments to implement these two guidelines for the purpose of implementation of Sustainable Sand Mining Policy, 2016 and also providing effective monitoring infrastructure to monitor the sand mining that is being taking place in the areas.
50. Though, exemption from Environmental Clearance was permitted as per schedule IX of EIA Notification, (amendment) 2016 dated 15.01.2016, it was insisted by various decisions of the Principal Bench as well as this Bench that in the guise of de-silting no mining should be carried out and if it is done then it will amount to illegal mining. There were certain directions issued by this Tribunal in respect of State of Andhra Pradesh in O.A. No. 71/2016 and O.A.No.147/2016 to be followed by the concerned departments in monitoring the sand mining.
51. In order to ascertain the genuineness of the allegations made in the application, this Tribunal had appointed a Joint Committee to go into the question and the Joint Committee had submitted the report and given their conclusions as follows:
21Conclusion of the committee
(i) The committee is of the view that Water Resource Department is carrying out sand extraction in River Godavari without scientifically assessing the quantity of silt deposits. Since the quantity of silt deposited and loss in storage capacity is not ascertained by Water Resource Department, it cannot be treated as de-siltation and has to be considered as mining. Further the sand extracted is used both for Government schemes and as well as for commercial purposes.
(ii) Water Resource Department have permitted three sand reaches namely Venkatanagaram sand reach, bridge lanka and ketavanilanka sand reach which are located near Dowleswaram barrage. Sand is extracted in all the three reaches manually through boats. The sand so extracted is brought to the bank and then loaded into trucks. In these three reaches heavy machinery is not used for sand extraction but heavy vehicles are plying on the river bed for sand transportation. Proper log books are not maintained on the quantity of sand extracted.
(iii) It was reported that the reaches are operational since 2016 onwards by renewing the permission for sand extraction. Currently, the renewal for sand extraction was accorded by WRD on 27.11.2020 and reported that operation resumed from November 28, 2020 and around 350- 600 Tonnes of sand is extracted per day (average 475 tonnes per day). Based on the information provided by M/s APMDC around 5700 tonnes of sand is extracted in each reach up to December 10, 2020 (till the date of commitee inspection). APMDC has fixed Cost of sand @Rs. 375 per tone (up to October 2}th 2020 );
and Rs. 525/tonne (October 21st 2020 onwards) for sand extracted from these three reaches. The total quantity of sand extracted in these three reaches (till December 10, 2020 up to committee inspection) is 17,100 tonnes and revenue generated by these three reaches is Rs. 89,77,500/-
(iv) Sand extraction in Venkatanagaram sand reach, bridgelanka and ketavanilanka is taking place upto a depth of 2.5m in an area of more than 10 hectares in each reach. As per Guidelines on Sustainable Sand mining published by Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, for mining of minor minerals (sand is a minor mineral) falling under category 'B2' for less than or equal to five hectares, permission has to be obtained by "District Environment Impact Assessment Authority" (DEIAA) and for more than five hectares permission/Clearance has to be obtained by SEIAA. The area of each sand reach is around 10 hectares and are operating without Environmental Clearnace from SEIAA. However, the State has considered it as for the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Notification Dt.15.01.2016, S.O. 141(E), Appendix-IX which exempt the De-silting in the river from requirement of prior Environment clearance and proceeded.
(v) Water Resource Department shall ensure that sand reaches are opcratcd in compliance of AP sand mining policy, 2019 and sustainable sand mining guidelines issued MOEFCC. The committee did not observe any environmental impacts or damage to structures near to the sand reaches in Dowleswaram.
(vi) In Kotipalli (ncar to the alleged location mentioned in the application),2 Km length Railway bridge from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram is under construction on the waterway out of which for a length of 700m natural flow of river Godavari is obstructed.
2252. Though, there was an allegation in the application that the area falls within CRZ Notification, but nothing was mentioned in the Joint Committee about the same. The Coastal Zone Management Authority also did not file any statement as to whether there was any mining activities carried out in the CRZ zone where sand mining was prohibited under CRZ Notification, 2011 as well as 2019 except for the purpose of removal of sand bars to the extent required for ensuring free flow of river to ensure free navigation of fisher boats for which clearance from the Coastal Zone Management Authority has to be obtained.
53. No attempt was made by the Joint Committee to ascertain this fact compared by superimposing the Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Plan in this area to ascertain as to whether this area falls in any of the zones characterized under CRZ Notification, 2011 or 2019. Even as per the guidelines issued by the Sustainable Sand Mining Policy by Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF & CC), no mechanised sand mining was permitted in the riverbed area and it will have to be done manually. Further, the Andhra Pradesh State Mining Policy issued in 2019 also re-imposes these conditions and insist for obtaining Environmental Clearance by the user agency for conducting sand mining and the sand mining is being done through the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation.
54. Though, there was a direction by the Principal Bench relating to river sand mining that district survey reports will have to be prepared to ascertain the quantity of sand available and the quantity of sand that can be permitted to the mining, there was nothing on record to show that prior to the report produced which was prepared in July 2021, any other report has been prepared by Mining Department to show that they have conducted such study and only thereafter, the permissions have been granted for the purpose of extracting sand.
55. It is seen from the Joint Committee report that the sand reaches were operational since 2016 onwards by renewing the permission for sand extraction and currently, the renewal for sand extraction was accorded by Water Resources Department (WRD) on 27.11.2020 and reported that 23 operations resumed from 28th November, 2020, and around 350-600 tonnes of sand was being extracted per day (average 475 tonnes per day). Based on the information provided by M/s APMDC around 5700 tonnes of sand was extracted in each reach up to 10th December, 2020 (till the date of committee inspection) and they fixed the cost of sand @Rs. 525/tonne of sand and the total quantity of the sand extracted from these three reaches till 10 th December, 2020 up to the Joint Committee inspection was 17,100 tonnes and revenue generated by these three reaches is Rs. 89,77,500/-.
56. Normally, the dredged material cannot be used for sale. Dredged/de-silted material is not expected to be used for sale on commercial basis and this will be normally used for the purpose of spreading over the low shore line area for the purpose of improving sand replenishment. If it is sold on commercial basis that will amount to winning of mineral and it will be mining under the Mining laws. It cannot be treated as de-silting/dredging. Further it is seen from the Joint Committee report that there was no survey conducted regarding the sediment deposited and without conducting such study, permissions have been granted to extract sand by using suction machines.
57. According to the Joint Committee, it will amount to mining which requires Environment Clearance and as such this will be deemed to be illegal mining. So under such circumstances, there was some force in the submission made by the Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant that there was an illegal sand mining to the tune of 17,100 tonnes from 10th December, 2020 up to the committees inspection and the revenue was generated to the tune of Rs. 89,77,500, M/s APMBC Limited to whom permission was granted for removal of sand as per the Sand Mining Policy.
58. So under circumstances, we feel that the APMDC limited is liable to pay an environmental compensation of Rs. 1 Crore to the State Pollution Control Board and this amount will have to be utilized for riverine environment protection along Godavari riverbed in East Godavari District (Now in Kakinada District), by preparing the action plan in consultation with the Additional Chief Secretary for Environment, Forest and Climate Change, State of Andhra Pradesh and Mining Department and the amount will have to be utilized for that purpose in scientific manner.
2459. Though, there was an allegation in the application that mechanised mining was being done, it is seen from the Joint Committee report that no such mining was being done using heavy machineries which was prohibited even under the Andhra Pradesh State Mining Policy issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is true that there was a ramp/bridge found as per the satellite images and on the date of inspection, it was found that, it was not seen in that area and an enquiry, it was revealed and it was washed away during monsoon. There was no evidence to show as to who had constructed the ramp/bridge and it is being used for illegal sand mining as alleged by the applicant. Further, there is no evidence or data available before this Tribunal as to who had involved in such illegal mining, either produced by the applicant or by the departments.
60. It is also seen from the Joint Committee report that for the purpose of construction of the railway bridge from Kotapalli to Muktheswaram and for a distance of 2kms, the construction of debris were seen dumped in that area for a distance of 700 mts which obstructs the flow of water to that extent. But it is seen from the various reports filed by the departments that it is only of temporary in nature and as and when the construction of the railway bridge is completed, the same will be removed. But it may be mentioned here that no one is expected to dump the construction waste in the river, so as to obstruct the free flow of water and whenever permissions are granted for construction, a construction agency is expected to see that the construction waste and debris that was generated in connection with construction activity has a responsibility to remove the same and dispose the same as provided under the Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules, 2016 and it is for the concerned authorities to take appropriate action in this regard. Since the railway is not a party to the proceedings, we feel that it is not proper on part of the Tribunal to issue any direction against them, but leave it to the concerned department to take appropriate action against them in accordance with law.
61. So under such circumstances, we feel that the application can be disposed of with the following directions:
(i) The finding of the Joint Committee that illegal sand mining was done atleast from 10th December, 2020, till the date of inspection to the tune of 25 17,100 metric tonnes on the basis of the permission granted by Water Resource Department to APMDC limited and they have sold the sand and generated a revenue Rs. 89,77,500 is accepted.
(ii) Since, illegal mining was done by APMDC Limited, they are directed to pay a environmental compensation Rs. 1 Crore to Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board within a period of 3 (three) months and if the amount is not paid, then Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board is directed to take appropriate action to recover the amount from them in accordance with law.
(iii) After recovering the amount, the State Pollution Control Board in coordination with the Director of Mining and Geology, Andhra Pradesh and the Additional Chief Secretary, Environment, Forest and Climate Change, State of Andhra Pradesh to evolve an action plan for utilizing this amount for improving the riverine environment along Godavari river in the erstwhile East Godavari District (Now in Kakinada District) and utilize the amount for that purpose in a scientific manner.
(iv) The Water Resources Department is directed to take appropriate action against the railways which had deposited the construction debris in Godavari river, while undertaking the construction of railway bridge for a distance of 2 Kms from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram, which causes obstruction to free flow of waster atleast to the extent of 700mts after issuing necessary show cause notice, giving opportunity to file their objection and after hearing them, pass appropriate orders in accordance to the law and if they did not remove the same, then the Water Resource Department is directed to remove the same and recover the cost from the railways in accordance with law.
(v) The Director of Mining & Geology, State of Andhra Pradesh as well the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Limited are directed to strictly adhere to the provisions of sand mining as provided under the respective mining laws, "Sand Mining Policy", State of Andhra Pradesh and the guidelines issued by Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF & CC) in 2016 and 2020 and also the directions issued by this Tribunal in O.A. No.177/2016 & O.A. No. 47/2016 and also the directions issued by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 360/2015 by order 26 dated 15.01.2021 and if there is any violation committed, then the Director of Mines and Geology, State of Andhra Pradesh is directed to take appropriate action against those violator in accordance with law including imposition of environmental compensation apart from imposing penalties under the respective mining laws.
(vi) The Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority is directed to conduct independent enquiry as to whether during the period alleged in the application, any sand mining was conducted, in CRZ zone as per the CRZ Notification against that provisions of that notification by any person including the departments then they are directed to take appropriate action against those violators including the department in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of issuing show cause notice filing objections and hearing and also impose environmental compensation and recover the amount from them in accordance with law, after complying with the principles of natural justice.
62. Points are answered accordingly.
63. In the result, the application is allowed in part and disposed of by issuing following directions:
(i) The finding of the Joint Committee that illegal sand mining was done atleast from 10th December, 2020, till the date of inspection to the tune of 17,100 metric tonnes on the basis of the permission granted by Water Resource Department to APMDC limited and they have sold the sand and generated a revenue Rs. 89,77,500 is accepted.
(ii) Since, illegal mining was done by APMDC Limited, they are directed to pay a environmental compensation Rs. 1 Crore to Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board within a period of 3 (three) months and if the amount is not paid, then Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board is directed to take appropriate action to recover the amount from them in accordance with law.
(iii) After recovering the amount, the State Pollution Control Board in coordination with the Director of Mining and Geology, Andhra Pradesh and the Additional Chief Secretary, Environment, Forest and Climate Change, State of Andhra Pradesh to evolve an action plan for utilizing this 27 amount for improving the riverine environment along Godavari river in the erstwhile East Godavari District (Now in Kakinada District) and utilize the amount for that purpose in a scientific manner.
(iv) The Water Resources Department is directed to take appropriate action against the railways which had deposited the construction debris in Godavari river, while undertaking the construction of railway bridge for a distance of 2 Kms from Kotipalli to Muktheswaram, which causes obstruction to free flow of waster atleast to the extent of 700mts after issuing necessary show cause notice, giving opportunity to file their objection and after hearing them, pass appropriate orders in accordance to the law and if they did not remove the same, then the Water Resource Department is directed to remove the same and recover the cost from the railways in accordance with law.
(v) The Director of Mining & Geology, State of Andhra Pradesh as well the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Limited are directed to strictly adhere to the provisions of sand mining as provided under the respective mining laws, "Sand Mining Policy", State of Andhra Pradesh and the guidelines issued by Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) in 2016 and 2020 and also the directions issued by this Tribunal in O.A. No.177/2016 & O.A. No. 47/2016 and also the directions issued by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 360/2015 by order dated 15.01.2021 and if there is any violation committed, then the Director of Mines and Geology, State of Andhra Pradesh is directed to take appropriate action against those violator in accordance with law including imposition of environmental compensation apart from imposing penalties under the respective mining laws.
(vi) The Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority is directed to conduct independent enquiry as to whether during the period alleged in the application, any sand mining was conducted, in CRZ zone as per the CRZ Notification against that provisions of that notification by any person including the departments then they are directed to take appropriate action against those violators including the department in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of issuing show cause notice filing objections and hearing and also impose environmental compensation and 28 recover the amount from them in accordance with law, after complying with the principles of natural justice.
(vii) Considering the circumstances parties are directed to bare the respective cost in the application.
(viii) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the District Collector, Kakinada District, the Director of Mines and Geology, State of Andhra Pradesh and respective Directors of the Districts, Andhra Pradesh State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority, Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, the Additional Chief Secretary to Government for Environment, Forest & Climate Change, State of Andhra Pradesh for their information and complying with the direction.
64. With the above observations and directions, the original application is disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, JM Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM O.A. No.187/2020 (SZ) 27th September 2022. AD 29