Case Note & Summary
This judgment arises from a series of interlocutory applications in the ongoing T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India public interest litigation concerning forest protection across India. The specific applications relate to mining activities in and around the Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary in Rajasthan and the broader issue of prescribing eco-sensitive zones (ESZ) around national parks and wildlife sanctuaries. The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) submitted a report in 2003 detailing extensive illegal mining within the sanctuary and recommended cancellation of mining leases, a safety zone of 100 meters for existing mines and 500 meters for new mines, reclamation of mined areas, recovery of compensation, and disciplinary action. The Court also considered a 2012 CEC report on ESZ and earlier orders in Goa Foundation v. Union of India regarding a 10 km buffer zone. The Court examined the conflicting interests of conservation and economic exploitation. It held that the precautionary principle mandates a minimum ESZ of 1 km around all protected areas, and mining within such zones is absolutely prohibited. The Court rejected the CEC's recommendation for a 100-meter safety zone for existing mines, finding it inadequate. It directed the State of Rajasthan to cancel all mining leases within the sanctuary and ESZ, implement reclamation plans at the cost of the lessees, recover compensation for illegally removed minerals, and take disciplinary action against erring officials. The Court also directed all states to notify ESZ of at least 1 km around all national parks and wildlife sanctuaries within three months, and to prohibit mining, construction, and other commercial activities within those zones. The judgment balances environmental protection with sustainable development, emphasizing the public trust doctrine and intergenerational equity.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Eco-Sensitive Zones - Minimum Extent - The Supreme Court directed that a minimum eco-sensitive zone of 1 km from the boundary of all national parks and wildlife sanctuaries must be maintained, and mining within such zones is prohibited. The Court held that the precautionary principle requires a buffer to protect the integrity of protected areas. (Paras 1-10) B) Mining - Prohibition in Protected Areas - The Court banned all mining activities within national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and their eco-sensitive zones, rejecting the CEC's recommendation of a 100-meter safety zone for existing mines. The Court held that mining is incompatible with conservation and must cease entirely. (Paras 2-8) C) Forest Conservation - Central Empowered Committee - The Court accepted the CEC's recommendations for reclamation and rehabilitation of mined areas, recovery of compensation for illegally extracted minerals, and disciplinary action against erring officials. The Court directed the State of Rajasthan to implement these measures. (Paras 2-3, 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether mining and other commercial activities should be permitted within eco-sensitive zones around national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, and what should be the extent of such zones.
Final Decision
The Court directed that a minimum eco-sensitive zone of 1 km from the boundary of all national parks and wildlife sanctuaries must be maintained, and mining within such zones is absolutely prohibited. All mining leases within Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary and its ESZ are to be cancelled. The State of Rajasthan must implement reclamation plans, recover compensation for illegally extracted minerals, and take disciplinary action against erring officials. All states must notify ESZ of at least 1 km within three months.
Law Points
- Precautionary Principle
- Sustainable Development
- Public Trust Doctrine
- Intergenerational Equity
- Eco-Sensitive Zones
- Mining Ban in Protected Areas
