National Green Tribunal
Bimal Baroi And Ors vs State Of Assam And Ors on 11 December, 2024
Item No.05 Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA
(THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)
Original Application No.94/2024/EZ
(Earlier O.A. No.96/2024/PB)
Bimal Baroi & Ors. Applicant(s)
Versus
State of Assam & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 11.12.2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s) : None
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Kumar, Adv. for R-1 & 2,
Ms. Amrita Pandey, Adv. for R-3 (in Virtual Mode),
Ms. Malabika Roy Dey, Adv. for R-4, 5 & 6,
Mr. Chandan Choudhary, Adv. for R-7,
ORDER
1. Case called out. No one is present on behalf of the Applicants. On 13.08.2024 and 27.09.2024 also no one has appeared on behalf of the Applicants, though notice was issued to the Applicant/Complainant vide order dated 27.09.2024.
2. Affidavit dated 04.12.2024 has been filed by the Respondent No.7, Purnam Deb; the same is taken on record.
3. Affidavit dated 10.12.2024 has been filed by the Respondent No.3, State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Assam; the same is taken on record.
4. Affidavit dated 27.11.2024 has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No.4, District Commissioner, Hailakandi; the same is taken on record.
1
5. We have heard the Counsel for the parties present and have perused the documents on record.
(Final order of this case will be uploaded in the NGT website by separate sheets of papers) ..................................... B. Amit Sthalekar, JM ............................................. Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM December 11, 2024, Original Application No.94/2024/EZ (Earlier O.A. No.96/2024/PB) SKB 2 Item No.05 Court No.1 BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE) Original Application No.94/2024/EZ (Earlier O.A. No.96/2024/PB) IN THE MATTER OF:
Bimal Baroi & Ors.
Lalacherra Grant Tea Garden area, P.O. - Lalacherra, Dist. - Hailakandi, Assam - 788163 .... Applicant(s) Versus
1. Central Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary,
2. Assam State Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary,
3. State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Assam, through its Member Secretary,
4. District Magistrate, Halai Kandi, Assam,
5. Department of Environment and Forest, Through its Additional Chief Secretary, State of Assam,
6. Directorate of Geology and Mining Through its Director, Assam
7. Mr. Purnam Deb, Vill. - Bangram, Bhangabazar, P.O. & P.S. - Dholai - 788120, .... Respondent(s) Date of hearing: 11.12.2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER For Applicant(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Kumar, Adv. for R-1 & 2, Ms. Amrita Pandey, Adv. for R-3 (in Virtual Mode), Ms. Malabika Roy Dey, Adv. for R-4, 5 & 6, Mr. Chandan Choudhary, Adv. for R-7 3 ORDER
1. This matter has been received from the New Delhi Bench of the Tribunal where the case was earlier registered as Original Application No.96/2024/PB and upon transfer the said Original Application has been re-numbered as Original Application No.94/2024/EZ.
2. The relevant part of the letter petition enumerating grievances of the Applicants is reproduced as follows:-
"X X X X With reference to the subject cited above, We the local people of Lalacherra Grant tea garden area, we have been seen that the Lalacherra Sand Mining ( Mohal ) awarded as the name of Punam Deb ( Silchar ) in 2022. But they are started of sand mining unlawful) without following the guidelines of AMMCR2013 rules and also their mining plans. That Sir, the extraction of sand from the river bed will not go beyond the depth of 3.0 mtrs from the unmined top level of river bed at any point under the provision of rule 39(iii) of AMMCR2013 but they are illegally extracted of sand above 3.0 mtr. For that reason, in this rain season soil collapsed from bank of river both side, as a result there are so many trees have been collapsed and destroyed. That sir, Another incident is happened on 22-08-2023 there are a small paved bridge connection Chuta Nunai Village over the Lalacherra Nala in the mining area is on the verge of collapse. As a result of which the bridge is currently leaning to one side. There is a possibility of collapse at any moment. And if the bridge is broken the people of Chota Nunai area faces so many problems. So many students used to go school on this bridge. But they have not bothered any rules and regulations. That sir, Sand collection at limited quantity through manual as stated on mining plan and also AMMCR-2013 rules but they are using JCB excavator and Sand Machine. That sir, the sand extracted and stacked will not exceed twice the average monthly production as stated on AMMCR-2013 rules but they are stacked huge amount of sand at various location of stock Yard. So, we would like to respectfully request your honour kindly 4 to take necessary action on illegal mining, we will very grateful to you."
3. At the time of admission, the Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee comprising of the following Members:-
(i) Central Pollution Control Board,
(ii) Assam Pollution Control Board, and
(iii) District Magistrate, Haila kandi,
4. The Committee was directed to inspect the site in question and submit a Fact Finding Report with remedial action.
5. Affidavit dated 11.07.2024 has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No.2, Pollution Control Board, Assam. Along with this affidavit, an Inspection Report of an inspection carried out by the Joint Committee on 22.05.2024 has been filed as Annexure-C. The Inspection Report reads as under:-
"Inspection Report in the matter of OA No.96/2024 (Bimal Baroi & Ors. -vs- State of Assam & Ors.
1.0 BACKGROUND The Hon'ble NGT, Principal Bench, New Delhi has taken up a complaint based on a letter petition (By Mr. Bimal Baroi & Others) received by post against sand mining being carried out unlawfully without following the guidelines of Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules (AMMCR), 2013 and the mining plans.
Hearing the matter, the Hon'blc court in its order dated 23.04.2024 (copy enclosed Annexure-I) constituted a Joint Committee consisting representatives from Central Pollution Control Board, Assam Pollution Control Board and the District Magistrate, Hailakandi to look into the grievances of the applicant, associate the applicant and representative of 5 the concerned project proponent, verify the factual position and take appropriate remedial action.
Accordingly, the Committee consisting of nominated members from the different organizations, as tabulated below, visited the site on 22.05.2024.
SI. No. Members
1 Dr. G.P.Singh, Scientist-D, Central Pollution Control
Board, Regional Directorate, Shillong 2 Sri Arabinda Das, Assistant Executive Engineer, Pollution Control Board Assam.
3 Sri BhaskarJyotiTalukdar, ALRS, Circle Officer, Lala Revenue Circle, Hailakandi, Assam 2.0 FIELD INSPECTION The Committee visited the site on 22.05.2024 and performed inspection to ascertain the allegations made in the original application (O.A.) which are as tabulated below:
Sl. Grievances raised by the Present Status as No. Applicant observed
1. The extraction of sand • Upon inspection it was from the river bed will found that there was not go beyond the depth considerable amount of 3 meters from the of water flowing through unmined top level of the the rivulet and the river bed at any point riverbed was underneath under the provision of water, hence the river Rule 39, sub rule iii of bed cannot be seen. (see AMMCR, 2013 but the fig 2, Annexure II) project proponent is • No collapse of river banks illegally extracting was found. Though some sand from beyond the trees were found depth of 3 meters uprooted nearby the leading to collapse of rivulet, the cause, as river banks on both reported by the local sides and destruction of people and the forest trees. department was the recent storm that passed through the area and the 6 entire Barak Valley.
2. The small paved bridge The Lalcherra Sand Mining connecting Chuta Nunai Contract area is located Village over the 826 meters (aerial) Lalacherra Nala in the downstream of the paved mining area is on the verge of collapse and is bridge connecting Chuta currently leaning to one Nunai Village over the side due to the sand Lalacherra Nala (see figure extraction from the river 3, Annexure II). As reported bed.
by the local populace, the middle pillar of the bridge started to sink around the year 2020 which was before the mining started in the area. A letter was sent to the BDO, Hailakandi Development Block, which is the implementing agency of the said bridge project to confirm the aforesaid fact.
Reply to the letter is
however, awaited.
3. Use of JCB and Sand No excavator or mining
Machines in violation of machinery was seen at the
mining plan and AMMCR, time of visit.
2013 As reported, JCBs were
used only to load the mined
sand from the stockyard
onto the trucks for onward
movement.
4. Sand extracted and As seen during inspection,
stocked shall not exceed the project proponent had
twice the quantity of
stocked the mined sand in
average monthly
three (3) places beside the
production as per
approved mining leased area for loading into
plan/scheme as stated in trucks and onward delivery
AMMCR, 2013 but the to various locations.
project proponent has
The amount of sand
stacked huge amount of
sand at various locations. stocked (see fig. 6&7,
Annexure II) as seen at the
7
time of inspection was
estimated to be less than
twice the quantity of
average monthly
production, i.e. 1743 m3.
However, the precise
quantity could not be
determined by the joint
committee upon visual
inspection.
Associating the applicant and representative of the concerned project proponent The committee tried to contact all the applicants as well as the representatives of the project proponent however the committee could meet a few applicants and representatives of project proponent as detailed below:
2.1 Mr. Bimal Baroi (Applicant No.7) of Katlicherra reported that his original name was Shankar Baroi and denied signing on the petition. According to him, someone else signed without his knowledge using his nickname/commonly known name.
2.2 Mr. Zakir Hussain Mazumdar (Applicant No.2), S/O Late Samsul Hague Mazumdar, resident of Nunai Forest village denied signing on the petition and reported that someone else signed using his name. He has no objection regarding the sand mining in the area. 2.3 There is no person in the name of 'Anukul Kumar Nath' (Applicant No.1) as reported by the local populace in the area. However, one person named `Mr. Anukul Chandra Nath', S/O Late Brij Mohan Nath, Vill- . Kachori Thala Forest, Ph.-9401105454 could be traced who is a teacher by profession. He denied signing on the petition and reported that someone else signed using his name. He has no objection regarding the sand mining in the area. 2.4 The other persons mentioned in the list of applicants could not be traced and were unknown to the local population of the nearby villages.8
2.5 The concerned project proponent was represented by 2 persons namely:-
i. Mr. Ajoy Kumar Deb, Address- Rangpur, Silchar-9, Dist: Cachar ii. Mr. Panna Roy, Address: Rangpur, Silchar-9, Dist: Cachar.
3.0 OVERALL OBSERVATIONS:
The overall observations made in the matter are as follows:
3.1 No mining was being carried out during the time of inspection on 22.05.2024. As stated by the project proponent, mining of sand is not feasible during the monsoon months and hence no mining activity is done during the months from May until August. 3.2 No excavator or mining machinery was observed at the time of visit.
3.3 As reported by the Divisional Forest Officer, Hailakandi, there is no District Survey Report for Hailakandi district and that the preparation of DSR is under process.
3.4 It is very surprising that the reserve estimation of sand has been done without District Survey Report which is in contrary to the Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines (SSMMG), 2016. The reserve estimation of sand was done by a Recognised Qualified Person (RQP) recognised by the Director of Geology and Mining, Assam using a simple multiplication of the Area leased for mining multiplied by the allowable depth of 3 meters, as given in the Mining Plan. However, it is also to be mentioned that the maximum depth of mining allowed by the SEIAA was 2 meters.
As per SSMG, 2016, the district level survey report should be prepared and area suitable for mining and area prohibited for mining be identified.
3.4 The boundary pillars were not of sufficient height and were not marked with the GPS co-ordinates in violation of Rule 38 (8) of AMMCR, 2013. They were also not placed in the exact location as provided in the mining plan. As per SSMG, 2016, mining should begin only after pucca pillar marking the boundary of lease area is erected at the cost of the lease holder after certification by the mining official and 9 its geo coordinates are made available to the district level committee.
3.5 The applicant raised the issues which were reported to be violating the provisions of the `AMMCR, 2013'. However, after the notification of the `SSMG, 2016' and the `Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining (EMGSM), 2020', by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Govt. of India, the AMMCR, 2013 itself is found to be in contradiction of certain provisions of the aforesaid guidelines. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS:
In view of the above findings and observations, it is recommended as follows:-
4.1 The AMMCR were notified in 2013 by the State Govt. of Assam, subsequent to which the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Govt. of India notified the 'SSMG, 2016' and the EMGSM, 2020'. It is recommended that the AMMCR, 2013 be revisited and revised in line with the aforesaid two guidelines issued by the Central Govt. In the meantime, all sand mining activities in the state are to be allowed only in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Govt. of India and not the AMMCR, 2013.
4.2 District Survey Report (DSR) should be prepared in line with the Sustainable Sand Mining Guidelines, 2016 and the Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020. The DSR should make assessment of the Mineable Reserve in the region and mining be permitted in accordance to these guidelines only."
6. This Inspection Report reveals that there is no District Survey Report (DSR) for Halaikandi District and that the preparation of DSR is under process; reserve estimation of sand has been done without District Survey Report which is in contravention of the Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines (SSMMG), 2016; reserve 10 estimation of sand was done by the Director of Geology and Mining, Assam, using a simple multiplication of the area leased for mining multiplied by the allowable depth of 3 meters; boundary pillars were not of sufficient height and were not marked with the GPS coordinates in violation of Rule 38(8) of Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules (AMMCR), 2013. The pillars were not placed at the exact location as provided in the mining plan. The Report mentions that as per the Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines (SSMMG), 2016, mining should begin only after pucca pillar marking the boundary of lease area is erected at the cost of the lease holder after certification by the mining official.
7. Along with this affidavit, copy of Environmental Clearance dated 17.06.2023 has also been filed which shows that the same was granted in favour of Purnam Deb. Since Purnam Deb was not a party Respondent to the present Original Application, the Tribunal vide order dated 13.08.2024 directed Purnam Deb be impleaded in the array of Respondents as Respondent No.7.
8. The State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Assam, Respondent No.3, has filed affidavit dated 20.08.2024 stating therein that in terms of the order of this Tribunal dated 23.07.2024 passed in Original Application No.86/2024/EZ (Pradeep Singh Shekhawat Vs. Union of India & Ors.), the Government of Assam has directed all the District Commissioners and Divisional Forest Officers to ensure that the District Survey Reports (DSRs) are completed by the year end of 2024. It is further stated that the preparation of DSRs is in progress in the State of Assam.
9. The District Commissioner, Hailakandi, Respondent No.4, has filed affidavit dated 26.09.2024 stating therein that the draft DSR has 11 already been uploaded in the District Portal and the information has also been publicized in the local newspaper and all mining operations will be governed in the District as per final DSR.
10. The SEIAA, Assam, Respondent No.3, has filed further affidavit dated 10.12.2024, bringing on record the Environmental Clearance dated 17.06.2023 which has been granted in favour of Purnam Deb, Respondent No.7.
11. Affidavit dated 04.12.2024 has been filed by the Respondent No.7, Purnam Deb, stating that the Applicants of the present Original Application have lodged a complaint alleging unchecked and illegal sand excavation thereby causing severe environmental degradation in Hailakandi District, particularly referring to the mining operation being carried on by the Respondent No.7. It is further stated that Environmental Clearance dated 17.06.2023 has been granted in favour of the Respondent No.7 by the SEIAA, Assam, in terms of the EIA Notification, 2006.
12. The District Commissioner, Hailakandi, Respondent No.4, has filed further affidavit dated 27.11.2024 stating that in terms of the order of this Tribunal dated 23.07.2024 passed in Original Application No.86/2024/EZ (Pradeep Singh Shekhawat Vs. Union of India & Ors.), the Government of Assam has directed all District Commissioners and Divisional Forest Officers, to ensure that the District Survey Reports are completed by the end of the year 2024. It is also stated that the mining activities will be permitted to be carried out only after final approval of the DSRs which is under progress.
13. We have gone through the Original Application and heard the learned Counsel for the Respondents and perused the documents on 12 record. The categorical stand of the Respondent is that the DSRs for the State of Assam have not been finalized so far and the mining activities have been stayed in the State of Assam in view of the directions of this Tribunal dated 23.07.2024 passed in Original Application No.86/2024/EZ (Pradeep Singh Shekhawat Vs. Union of India & Ors.), and no mining operations are permitted to be carried out within the State of Assam till completion and approval of the DSRs in all the Districts of State of Assam.
14. In view of the above, nothing further remains for adjudication in the present Original Application. We, therefore, dispose of the Original Application No.94/2024/EZ with a direction that the Respondent No.7, Purnam Deb, will not carry out any mining activities in Hailakandi District, Assam, till the District Survey Report (DSR) is not prepared, completed and duly approved by the SEIAA, Assam, for the said District.
15. I.As. if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
16. There shall be no order as to costs.
..................................... B. Amit Sthalekar, JM ............................................. Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM December 11, 2024, Original Application No.94/2024/EZ (Earlier O.A. No.96/2024/PB) AK 13