Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court, in a clarification application, addressed the permissibility of mining activities in relation to Protected Areas and Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs). The background involved a previous judgment in I.A. No. 131377 of 2022 along with connected applications in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995, pronounced on 26th April 2023, which led to uncertainty regarding mining restrictions. The applicant, who had been granted permission for a mining lease as early as 2005 subject to clearances from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF) and the National Board for Wild Life, sought clarification on whether mining could be conducted beyond one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, specifically the Radhanagari Wildlife Sanctuary, even if the area fell under an ESZ. The applicant argued that the proposed mining site was beyond 2.26 kilometers from the sanctuary's boundary, thus outside the one-kilometer limit. The core legal issue was the interpretation of mining prohibitions in ESZs vis-à-vis Protected Areas. The applicant's submissions, presented by learned senior counsel Shri Ranjit Kumar, focused on the distance criterion. The Court's analysis centered on clarifying that the one-kilometer prohibition from Protected Areas applies irrespective of ESZ notifications by MoEF, aiming to prevent environmental damage. The decision provided a clear directive that mining is not allowed within one kilometer of Protected Area boundaries, regardless of ESZ status, thereby resolving the ambiguity and reinforcing environmental protection measures.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Eco-Sensitive Zones - Mining Restrictions - Not mentioned - The Supreme Court clarified that mining activities are prohibited within one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, regardless of whether the area is within an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF). This clarification was issued to prevent further environmental damage and to address ambiguity following a previous judgment. The Court emphasized that the one-kilometer restriction applies irrespective of ESZ status, thereby upholding environmental safeguards. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether mining activities are permissible beyond the distance of one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, even if such area falls under an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF).
Final Decision
The Supreme Court clarified that mining activities are not permissible within one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, irrespective of whether the area falls under an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF).
Law Points
- Mining activities are prohibited within one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area
- irrespective of whether the area falls under an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notified by the Ministry of Environment
- Forest and Climate Change (MoEF).
Case Details
I.A. No. 131377 of 2022 along with connected applications in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995
IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. AND IN THE MATTER OF: M/S. PUNTAMBEKAR MINERALS ( THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI DILIP BHAUSAHEB MADAKE )
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Clarification application regarding mining restrictions near Protected Areas and Eco-Sensitive Zones.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought clarification on whether mining activities are permissible beyond one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, even if the area falls under an Eco-Sensitive Zone.
Filing Reason
To clarify the position following a previous judgment to prevent further environmental damage.
Previous Decisions
A judgment was pronounced in I.A. No. 131377 of 2022 along with connected applications in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995 on 26th April 2023.
Issues
Whether mining activities are permissible beyond the distance of one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, irrespective of whether such an area falls under an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF).
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant submitted that the proposed mining area is beyond 2.26 kilometers from the nearest boundary of the Radhanagari Wildlife Sanctuary, thus beyond the one-kilometer distance from the Protected Area.
Ratio Decidendi
Mining activities are prohibited within one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area to prevent environmental damage, and this restriction applies regardless of whether the area is designated as an Eco-Sensitive Zone by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
Judgment Excerpts
When we pronounced our judgment in I.A. No. 131377 of 2022 along with connected applications in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995 on 26th April 2023, we did not anticipate that within a few days, we would be called upon to clarify the position as to whether mining activities would be permissible beyond the distance of one kilometer from the boundary of the Protected Area, irrespective of the fact that such an area falls under the Eco-Sensitive Zone (in short “ESZ”) notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEF” for short).
We are grateful to the applicant in the present application for giving us this opportunity to clarify this position so that further environmental damage is avoided.
The case of the applicant, in brief, is that the applicant was granted permission to execute a mining lease as early as in 2005, subject to clearance from MoEF as well as the National Board for Wild Life.
Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant, submits that the area where the applicant proposes to carry out the activity is beyond 2.26 kilometer from the nearest boundary of the Radhanagari Wildlife Sanctuary.
It is, therefore, submitted that it falls beyond a distance of one kilomete r from the boundary of the Protected Area.
Procedural History
A judgment was pronounced in I.A. No. 131377 of 2022 along with connected applications in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995 on 26th April 2023. Subsequently, a clarification application was filed to address whether mining activities are permissible beyond one kilometer from the boundary of a Protected Area, even if within an Eco-Sensitive Zone.
