Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(emphasis added) The Apex Court in the case of M.C.Mehta V/s Union of India (supra) has constituted a Monitoring Committee with a view to monitor the overall eco- restoration efforts in the Aravalli Hills and came to the following conclusions:-
"96. 5. The mining activity can be permitted only on the basis of sustainable development and on compliance of stringent conditions.
6. The Aravalli hill range has to be protected at any cost. In case despite stringent conditions, there is an adverse irreversible effect on the ecology in the Aravalli hill range area, at a later date, the total stoppage of mining activity in the area may have to be considered. For similar reasons such step may have to be considered in respect of mining in Faridabad District as well.

In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (104) Vs. Union of India & Ors., ((2008) 2 SCC 222), the Apex Court observed that adherence to the principle of sustainable development is now a constitutional requirement. It is the duty of the State under the Constitution to devise and implement a coherent and coordinated programme to meet its obligation of sustainable development based on inter-generational equity.

In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (60) Vs. Union of India & Ors., ((2009) 17 SCC 764), mining activity in Aravalli Hills, especially in that part which has been regarded as forest area or protected under Environment (Protection) Act was prohibited and banned by the Apex Court. Chief Secretaries of Haryana and Rajasthan were directed to file compliance report. Thereafter, in the same case T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad VS. Union of India & Ors., reported in (2009) 6 SCC 142, the Apex Court has held that when mining leases were granted, 'requisite clearances for carrying out mining operations' were not obtained which have resulted in land and environmental degradation. Despite such breaches, approvals were granted for subsequent slots because in the past the authorities had not taken into account the macro effect of such wide- scale land and environmental degradation caused by the absence of remedial measures (including rehabilitation plan). Time has now come, therefore, to 'suspend' mining in the Aravalli hill range till statutory provisions for restoration and reclamation are duly complied with, particularly in cases where pits/quarries have been left abandoned. Environment and ecology are national assets. They are subject to intergenerational equity. Time has now come to suspend all mining in the said area on sustainable development principle which is part of Articles 21, 48-A and 51-A(g) of the Constitution of India. Mining within the principle of sustainable development comes within the concept of "balancing" whereas mining beyond the principle of sustainable development comes within the concept of "banning". It is a matter of degree. Balancing of the mining activity with environment protection and banning such activity are two sides of the same principle of sustainable development. They are parts of precautionary principle. It has further been held that the provisions of Rule 27(1)(s)(i) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960, Rules 34 and 37 of the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, 1988 and the guidelines issued under the said Rules of 1988 have not been complied with. Hence, all mining operations in the Aravalli hill range falling in the State of Haryana within the area of approximately 448 sq. km. in the districts of Faridabad and Gurgaon, including Mewat have been suspended.

In M.C.Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors., (2009) 6 SCC 142, the Apex Court has held that environment and ecology are national assets. They are subject to intergenerational equity. Time has now come to suspend all mining in the said area on sustainable development principle which is part of Articles 21, 48A and 51-A(g) of the Constitution of India. The Apex Court has laid down thus:-

"4. The question to be answered at the outset is why did this Court impose a complete ban on mining in the Aravalli range falling in the State of Haryana which broadly falls in District Gurgaon and District Faridabad, including Mewat?

5-1994 issued by MoEF under Section 3(2) of the EP Act, 1986 read with Rule 6, environment impact assessment (EIA) before commencement of any mining operation became mandatory. Therefore, by order dated 29-10-2002/30-10- 2002, when this Court found large-scale mining without approved plans, it decided to ban all mining activities in the Aravalli range."

In Centre for Public Interest Litigation and ors. V/s Union of India & ors. (JT 2012 (2) SC