Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. By submitting the Annexure-A3, it is submitted that MPSEIAA has accorded EC over more quantity of sand than mentioned in the tender document. In the case of district Chhatarpur a total number of 48 sand quarries were floated through tender for a total quantity of 15,00,000 cubic meters of sand. Till date, fresh EC/transfer EC has been accorded only in 20 sand quarries out of 48 sand quarries but the environment clearance has been issued for 27,43,633 m3 of sand. An excess of12,43,633 ms of sand is already granted by MPSEIAA despite the fact that the fresh EC/transfer of EC is yet to be done for over 28 sand quarries. This is done solely for the purposes of promoting illegal extraction of sand. The tabular showing variation as annexed A-3 is as follows:

5. (1) Demarcation of sand quarries The Collector, shall identify new sand bearing areas in rivers or on other places of the State. D.G.P.S. survey shall be carried out and its location on revenue map alongwith Latitude and Longitudes shall be marked:

Provided that the sand quarries demarcated and declared prior to the commencement of these rules, may be amended by following the same procedure as required.

(2) Declaration of sand quarries The sand quarry identified as per sub-rule (1) above shall be declared by the Collector, after making such inquiry as he deems fit, on receipt of information/application/proposal.

30. In light of the settled proposition of law in Goa Foundation vs. Union of India 2014 (6) SCC 738 before transferring EC, environmental status of the sand quarry has to be ascertained. Transfer of EC without taking the environmental considerations into account is brazen breach of law and abetment of destructive practices of sand mining.

The issue is decided accordingly.

Issue 3, 4 and 5

31. The contention of the Applicant/Appellants are that there are discrepancies in the quantity of sand mining sand quarry mentioned in the tender document and that is different in the Environment clearance granted for the specific quarry and the area (Khasra and Rakba) of the sand quarry mentioned in tender document is different in the Environmental Clearance granted for that specific sand quarries and that quantity over which environmental clearance is granted for a specific sand quarry is much above the quantity for which tender was floated over that specific sand quarry. The applicant in Original application No. 96 of 2020 has attached list A-1 (Para-4) which shows the discrepancies in number of mines and list annexure A-3 (Para-5) which shows that excess EC was granted as compared to NIT and there are certain number of mines for which EC was not granted. The list contains 33 numbers including the details of the districts and no detailed reply has been submitted by the MPSEIAA. During the course of hearing of Original Application this Tribunal constituted Committee of Expert members of State Authorities and after examination of some of the records they have filed a detailed chart in which it was found that there were discrepancies in the area of the lease mine and also in the quantity to be excavated. The list attached with the Joint Committee Report (F) shows mismatch not only the area but also in the quantity of sand to be excavated. Considering the discrepancies mentioned in the NIT and the EC granted the state has taken its decision to cancel the contract and a list has been submitted with the detail of 31 appeals/matter (Para 16, 18) relating to district Chhatarpur, Hosangabad and Panna where the lease has been cancelled or handed over and thus it is said that the appeal in these matters are infructuous. Though on the grounds mentioned above, the appeals no. Appeal No. 25/2021, Appeal No. 27/2021, Appeal No. 31/2021, Appeal No. 37/2021, Appeal No. 60/2021, Appeal No. 49/2021, Appeal No. 48/2021, Appeal No. 30/2021, Appeal No. 42/2021, Appeal No. 39/2021, Appeal No. 45/2021, Appeal No. 69/2021, Appeal No. 29/2021, Appeal No. 50/2021, Appeal No. 36/2021, Appeal No. 41/2021, Appeal No. 35/2021, Appeal No. 32/2021, Appeal No. 02/2021, Appeal No. 05/2021, Appeal No. 38/2021, Appeal No. 34/2021, Appeal No. 33/2021, Appeal No. 03/2021, Appeal No. 04/2021, Appeal No. 51/2021, Appeal No. 53/2021, Appeal No. 57/2021 Appeal No. 54/2021, Appeal No. 64/2021, Appeal No. 55/2021 stands disposed of as being infructuous but the points for determination that there is mismatch in the production capacity mentioned in the Notice inviting Tender and the Environmental Clearance and the quantity of sand quarry mentioned in the tender document is different in the Environmental Clearance granted for specific sand quarry and there is Khasra and rakba which were not made clear and there is change in the Khasra no. and also the quantity of the sand mining and all these mining lease where there is change of Khasra no. and increase in the quantity to be excavated are in violation of environmental rules, intended to defeat or defraud the provisions of environmental rules. We direct the MPSEIAA and MPSEAC to refrain themselves from issuing any further EC without actually carrying out the Environment Impact Assessment of the sand quarry and carry out the technical scrutiny of the same.

32. The perusal of the record reveals that the quantity of sand which has already been excavated or a sand quarry which was belonging to the previous lease holder has not been subtracted while transferring the environmental clearance in favour of the successful bidder/tenderor and the details of sand quarry has not been mentioned in the tender document and inspite of all these facts the EC has been granted by the MPSEIAA.

Madhya Pradesh rules, 2019 provides the Mining Plan which consist the location of the mines, quantity of mineable sand available in the sand quarry and mining plans shall be prepared only on the basis of actual quantity available/estimated and all the mining operation shall be carried out in accordance with the approved mining plan. The permissible quantity shall be up to the mineable quantity fixed in mining plan and it is required to calculate the mine which has been excavated by the previous lease holder and to reduce and subtract the amount which has already been mined while transferring the EC but the same has not been done by the mining department while proceedings in case of transfer of EC. Accordingly, we are of the view that quantity of sand which has already been excavated over a sand quarry which was belonging to the previous lease holder must be subtracted and in the cases where nothing has been done in accordance with the rules, it is in violation of environmental rules and directly or indirectly result the damage of environment. The issue is decided accordingly. It is further clarified that Section 26 of the MP Rules, 2019 which empowers the operation of the mining till March, 2022 or for two years from date of lease in accordance with the provisions of rule issued under MP Rules, 2019 shall be read with the notification issued by the MoEF & CC as contained in Para 11 Sub Clause 3 which provides the lease in favour of successful bidder, only for two years from the date of commencement of new lease and further provides that it shall be lawful for the new lessee to continue mining operation as per terms and conditions of Environmental Clearance granted to the previous lessee for a period of two years from the date of commencement of new lease or till the new lessee obtains a fresh environmental clearance.