Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging E-Auction for Sand Excavation Without Prior Environmental Clearance. Mandatory Environmental Clearance Under Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 Must Be Obtained Before Issuing E-Auction Notices for Sand Mining.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, M/s Jai Gajanan Shri Gajanan Building Material Suppliers, a proprietorship firm engaged in the business of excavation and transportation of sand, challenged e-auction notices issued by the District Collector, Akola on 18-11-2021 and 09-12-2021 for excavation of sand from various Sand-Ghats in Akola district. The petitioner contended that as per the revised excavation policy document dated 03-09-2019, it was necessary for the respondents to have obtained environmental clearance prior to issuing the e-tender notice, as excavation without such clearance was not permissible. The petitioner found that environmental clearance was yet to be obtained on the date of the e-auction. The respondents argued that the e-auction was being conducted as per the policy and that environmental clearance would be obtained subsequently. The court, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Deepak Kumar vs State of Haryana, held that environmental clearance is a mandatory prerequisite for issuing e-auction notices for sand mining. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the e-auction notices, and directed the respondents to obtain environmental clearance before proceeding with any fresh e-auction.

Headnote

A) Environmental Law - Sand Mining - Environmental Clearance - Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 - Policy Decision dated 03-09-2019 - The petitioner challenged e-auction notices issued by the District Collector for sand excavation without prior environmental clearance. The court held that as per the policy decision dated 03-09-2019 and the law laid down in Deepak Kumar vs State of Haryana, environmental clearance is mandatory before issuing e-auction notices for sand mining. The respondents were directed to obtain environmental clearance before proceeding with the e-auction. (Paras 2-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the respondents could issue e-auction notices for excavation of sand without first obtaining environmental clearance as required under the policy decision dated 03-09-2019 and the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the e-auction notices dated 18-11-2021 and 09-12-2021, and directed the respondents to obtain environmental clearance before proceeding with any fresh e-auction for sand excavation.

Law Points

  • Environmental clearance mandatory before e-auction for sand mining
  • Policy decision dated 03-09-2019 requires prior environmental clearance
  • Excavation without environmental clearance not permissible
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (01) 110

Writ Petition No.5480/2021

2022-01-13

A.S. Chandurkar, Pushpa V. Ganediwala

Mr. V.S. Kukday for petitioner, Ms N.P. Mehta for respondents

M/s Jai Gajanan Shri Gajanan Building Material Suppliers, through its Proprietor, Shri Dilip s/o Sahadeorao More

State of Maharashtra, The District Collector, Akola

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging e-auction notices for sand excavation without prior environmental clearance.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of e-auction notices dated 18-11-2021 and 09-12-2021 and direction to respondents to obtain environmental clearance before proceeding with e-auction.

Filing Reason

Respondents issued e-auction notices for sand excavation without obtaining mandatory environmental clearance as per policy decision dated 03-09-2019.

Issues

Whether environmental clearance is mandatory before issuing e-auction notices for sand excavation under the policy decision dated 03-09-2019 and the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that as per the policy decision dated 03-09-2019 and the Supreme Court judgment in Deepak Kumar vs State of Haryana, environmental clearance is mandatory before issuing e-auction notices for sand mining. Respondents contended that the e-auction was being conducted as per the policy and environmental clearance would be obtained subsequently.

Ratio Decidendi

Environmental clearance is a mandatory prerequisite for issuing e-auction notices for sand mining, as per the policy decision dated 03-09-2019 and the law laid down in Deepak Kumar vs State of Haryana. Excavation without environmental clearance is not permissible.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner being desirous of participating in that auction process found that environmental clearance was yet to be obtained by the respondents on the date of the e-auction. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the policy decision dated 03-09-2019 it was necessary for the respondents to have obtained environmental clearance prior to issuing the e-tender notice as excavation without such environmental clearance was not permissible.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.5480/2021 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging e-auction notices dated 18-11-2021 and 09-12-2021 issued by the District Collector, Akola. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 13-01-2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Domestic Violence Case — Restores Maintenance and Compensation. The court held that the appellate court's order setting aside maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Enhancement of Compensation in Motor Accident Claim for Death of Government Employee — Applies Multiplier of 13 and Adds Future Prospects. The court held that for a permanent employee aged 50, the multiplier should be 13 as...