National Green Tribunal
Raj Kishor Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh Through ... on 31 January, 2025
Item no. 2
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL
(Through Video Conferencing)
Original Application No.173/2024(CZ)
Raj Kishore Singh Applicant (s)
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of Hearing: 31.01.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant (s): Mr. Sourabh Balwani, Adv.
Mr. Raj Kishore Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prashant M. Harne, Adv.
Ms. Sapna Aggarwal, Adv.
Mr. Om Shankar Shrivastav, Adv.
Ms. Parul Bhadoria, Adv.
ORDER
1. The instant matter pertains to the substantial question of Environment, relating to the illegal, unplanned transportation of sand mineral through heavy vehicles by constructing temporary road, / path across the rivers Dhasan and Ken which is contrary to the River Health, statutory rules and permissions or mining plan currently followed by Respondent No. 2/MPSMCL.
2. It is further contended that more than 60 sand mining points are in operation in the district of chhatarpur, with sand mining activities primarily being carried out at River Dhasan and Ken in blatant violation of the Madhya Pradesh sand Mining Rules, 2019 and against the total 46 sand mines auctioned.
1 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
3. The exorbitant quantum of illegal mining of sand taking place at villages Tila (Tehsel-Nowgong) and Alipura (Tehsel_Nowgong) of District Chhatarpur, are illegally operating and most of the illegal mining and excavation of sand is taking place during day and night hours and by way of JCBs, Poklane, pandubbies and boat, in the instream mining which is illegal. The extracting sand illegally from the riverbed of the river Dhasan and Ken through JCB and transporting vehicles is leading to disruption of the river course of river Dhasan and Ken and causing environmental degradation.
4. The matter was taken up by this Tribunal and a committee consisting representative of the District Collector and one representative form the State Pollution Control Board was constituted with direction to submit the factual and action taken report.
5. In compliance of the order the members of committee visited the site and submitted the report with the following observations :
"The joint committee has taken the following actions:
5.1 That the Mining Department conducts regular inspection of these sand mines. In the year 2022-23, Ten cases of illegal mining in river Ken One case of illegal mining in river Dhasan have been registered. In the year 2024-25 four cases of illegal mining in river Ken have been registered. The list of cases filed by the Mining Department, Collector Office, District Chattarpur against persons involved in illegal sand mining activities for the year 2022-2023 and the year 2024-
2025 is filed.
5.2 That during the inspection a temporary way to the river was observed which was removed under the directions of the committee.
5.3 That the project proponent Euphoria Mines & Minerals Private Limited has planted 7310 trees under the terms of Environmental Clearance granted by SEIAA. The information provided to the Collector Office, District Chattarpur regarding the plantation carried by Project 2 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Proponent (Respondent no. 6) through letter no. 97 dated 14.09.2024.
6. Notices were also issued to the respondent and in compliance thereof the respondent no. 2. /MP State Mining Corporation Ltd. has submitted the reply with the facts that the Respondent No. 6 Euphoria Mines & Minerals Private Limited is the successful bidder vide order no. Sand/ Chattarpur /2023 /691 dated 26.08.2023 for total of 46 mines. Whereof, Environment Clearnce and CTE/CTO has been granted for 38 mines only and that as per Rule 12 (4) of the Madhya Pradesh Sand (Mining, Transportation, Storage and Trading) Rules, 2019 as under: - Rule 12 (4) Permissible Quantity The mining shall be permitted up to mineable quantity fixed in the mining plan, environmental clearance, water and air consent (whichever is less).
7. It is further submitted that the answering respondent on query raised by the committee has submitted the detail data, Quantity as per EC and year wise mining for the respective mines of the alleged area in the instant petition. The mined quantity of sand mineral is much less than that approved quantity as per EC and Consents issued by the SEIAA/Board. It's submitted the allegation raised by the petitioner against answering respondent is ought rightly denied. The answering respondent is an enterprise of the State of Madhya Pradesh entrusted for selection of contractors and operation of contracts on behalf of State of Madhya Pradesh under Sand (Mining, Transportation, Storage and Trading) Rules 2019(as amended). That, the answering respondent is committed to follow procedure and rules set by the authorities, circulars, OM, guidelines inter alia precedence set by the 3 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
various orders passed by Hon'ble Courts of law including Hon'ble National Green Tribunal.
8. The submission of the Learned Counsel for the Mining Corporation are that the necessary consent conditions have been issued by the State PCB and the EC has been issued by the competent authority in favour of the Project Proponent.
9. The Learned Counsel for the MoEF&CC has filed the reply and argued that State Department of Mines and Geology is the nodal authority in the State for dealing with the allotment of mining leases under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act (MMDR Act) and is entrusted with the enforcement and regulation of mining operations in a State including illegal mining. Further, the State Government is empowered under Section 23 C of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957(M MDR Act) to make rules for prevention of illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals. The State Pollution Control Board is the nodal authority in the State for dealing with cases related to pollution or environment management coming under the purview of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Environment Protection Act 1986. That it is further apprised to the Hon'ble Bench that respondent Ministry issued Environment Impact Assessments (herein after referred as "ETA") Notification dated 14th September, 2006 which requires certain projects to obtain prior Environmental Clearance ("EC") before any construction work in case of new projects or expansion and modernization of existing projects or activities. The Schedule to the 4 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Notification details the categories, projects, or activities, which require prior environmental clearance.
10. That all projects and activities are broadly categorized into two categories - Category "A" and Category "B", based on the spatial extent of potential impacts and potential impacts on human health and natural and manmade resources. Al! projects or activities included as Category 'A' in the Schedule, including expansion and modernization of existing projects or activities and change in product mix, require prior environmental clearance from the Central Government in the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and all projects or activities included as Category '13' in the Schedule require prior environmental clearance from the State/Union territory Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA).
11. The Ministry has formulated the guidelines i.e. "Enforcement & Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining" (E MGSM- 2020) supplemental to the existing guidelines i.e. Sustainable Sand Management Guidelines 2016 (SSMC-2016), which focus on the effective monitoring of the sand mining since from the identification of sand mineral sources to its dispatch and end-use by consumers and the general public. Further, this document will serve as a guideline for collection of critical information for enforcement of the regulatory provision(s) and also highlights the essential infrastructural requirement necessary for effective monitoring for Sustainable Sand Mining. Further, EMGSM-2020 & SSMG-2016 shall be read and implemented in sync with each other. In case, any ambiguity or variation between the provisions of both these documents arises the 5 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
provision made in 'Enforcement & Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining-2020" shall prevail.
12. In response to the notices issued to the Madhya Pradesh State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, the Learned Counsel for the SEIAA has filed the reply and submitted that the issuance of all environmental clearances (hereinafter referred as "EC") by the answering respondent follows a structured and rigorous evaluation process designed to ensure adherence to environmental regulations and principles of sustainable development. This process begins with project proponents submitting detailed documentation and requisite information through the Parivesh portal and upon submission, these documents undergo a thorough technical evaluation by the State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC), an expert body constituted to assess the potential environmental impact of proposed projects. based on its technical review, the SEAC provides recommendations, which are then scrutinized by the answering respondent and then SEIAA independently appraises these recommendations, considering all relevant statutory provisions and environmental factors, before granting the final EC. Furthermore, the answering respondent, in its capacity as the designated authority, not only issues ECs but also imposes specific conditions when deemed necessary to ensure compliance with applicable laws, guidelines, and directives issued by the various courts of law from time to time.
13. In the present matter, the answering respondent, within the jurisdiction of Tehsils Chandla, Nowgong, and Gaurihar of District Chhatarpur, has duly issued ECs to the Madhya Pradesh State Mining Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred as "MPSMCL") in a total 6 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
of 28 cases. These clearances were granted after a detailed and thorough assessment of the proposals submitted by MPSMCL, ensuring compliance with all relevant statutory provisions, guidelines, and environmental regulations. The issuance of these ECs followed the established procedure under the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, involving scrutiny of the requisite documentation, appraisal by the SEAC, and subsequent review by the answering respondent.
14. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), vide its Office Memorandum dated 14.06.2022, issued specific directions mandating that all six-monthly compliance reports required to be submitted by project proponents shall henceforth be filed exclusively through the PARIVESH portal. In furtherance of the said directions, the answering respondent, vide its Office Memorandum dated 22.07.2022, reiterated the instructions of the MoEF&CC, emphasizing the strict adherence to the submission of six-monthly compliance reports by all project proponents through the PARIVESH portal. Respondent, vide letter dated 13.08.2024, directed the MPSMCL to strictly ensure compliance with the provisions outlined in the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, which governs the procedure for granting environmental clearances and mandates ongoing adherence to prescribed environmental safeguards. The said letter further instructed MPSMCL to submit six-monthly compliance reports to both the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and the answering respondent, thereby ensuring regular monitoring and transparency in the implementation of the stipulated environmental conditions. Additionally, MPSMCL was explicitly directed to ensure full compliance with all general and 7 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
specific conditions mentioned in the EC including, but are not limited to, the development of green belts in mining areas.
15. In view of the submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the parties and in light of the observation in the report submitted by the SEIAA and the MoEF&CC the necessary EC have been issued by the Competent Authority and CTO have been issued by the State Pollution Control Board. The Joint Committee has submitted the report that the alleged temporary way has been removed and necessary actions have been taken. It is further submitted that the Project Proponent has planted trees in accordance with the terms and conditions of the EC issued by the SEIAA.
16. The applicant is present in person and submitted that another committee from the Delhi or from the Central Government should be constituted to examine the matter for the reasons that the Collector is respondent in the case. We have gone through the report and found that the Regional Officer District Sagar and the DGM of State Mining were also signatory in the report and it has been prepared by the four responsible officers. The Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned, Mining Officer, DGM State Mining and the Regional Officer of the District Sagar cannot be said to be partial in preparation of the report. Allegation as contended with regard to temporary way for which the committee has reported that this has been removed. Thus, nothing survives and no illegality has been reported by the committee and nothing has been substantiated by any cogent evidence by the applicant. Thus, no further action is required by this Tribunal. However, we direct the State Pollution Control Board and the Mining Department to regularly monitor the illegal mining in the area, 8 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
District Chhatarpur and in case of any reported case of illegal mining necessary action must be initiated according to rules. Accordingly, Original Application No. 173/2024 (CZ) stands disposed of.
Sheo Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM 31st January, 2025 O. A No. 173/2024(CZ) K 9 O. A No.173/2024(CZ) Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.