Case Note & Summary
Two writ petitions were filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by Common Cause and by Prafulla Samantra and Anr. against the Union of India and others, highlighting large-scale illegal mining in the Keonjhar, Sundergarh, and Mayurbhanj districts of Odisha. The litigation originated from an application filed by the editor of a newspaper, Rabi Das, in the pending writ petition of T.N. Godavarman v. Union of India, which led to the involvement of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC). The CEC submitted an interim report on 26 April 2010, which noted widespread non-compliance with statutory environmental and forest clearances, and made recommendations, including that mining lessees must possess environmental clearance, consent to operate from the State Pollution Control Board, approved mining plans, and deposit Net Present Value (NPV) for forest areas; that forest land requires prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980; and that deemed forest lands (DLC) also require NPV and, in certain cases, FC Act approval. The report also proposed that a portion of the recovered NPV be used for tribal welfare. The Court accepted the report and directed the State to respond. On 16 September 2013, the Court called for a fresh CEC report, and subsequent orders addressed objections by M/s Sarda Mines Private Limited and directed the CEC to submit its final report restricted to forest and environmental issues. Common Cause then filed W.P. (C) No. 114 of 2014 seeking a writ of mandamus to immediately stop all illegal mining, terminate violative leases, order a thorough investigation by an SIT or CBI, and recover illegally accumulated wealth under Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. On 21 April 2014, the Court upheld the maintainability of the writ petition and, observing that several lessees were operating without clearances under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and without valid renewal by the Government, directed the CEC to prepare a list of such lessees and listed the matter for consideration of interim orders. The CEC submitted its final report on 25 April 2014, and on 16 May 2014 the Court passed a detailed interim order, though its contents are not fully available in the text. The Court noted the mining scandal of enormous proportions, the destruction of environment and forests, and the inadequate contribution of lessees to tribal welfare. The Court reasoned that statutory clearances are mandatory, that the deemed extension provision does not exempt lessees from obtaining clearances, and that the Court’s jurisdiction under Article 32 empowers it to intervene and pass interim orders to prevent violation of law. The judgment remains interim, and further proceedings are ongoing.
Headnote
A) Mining Regulation - Statutory Clearances for Deemed Extension Leases - Rule 24-A(6) of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 - Lessee operating under deemed extension must possess environmental clearance, consent to operate from State Pollution Control Board, approved mining plan, and deposit NPV for forest area; mining in forest land requires additional FC Act approval. Held that non-compliance renders operations illegal (Paras 4, 9). B) Forest Law - Mandatory Forest Clearance - Section 2, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 - No forest land can be leased without prior FC Act approval; forest area approved under FC Act must equal total forest area in mining lease (Paras 4). C) Forest Law - Deemed Forest Land (DLC) - Supreme Court Order dated 12.12.1996 - In Orissa, DLC areas require NPV payment; mining in unbroken DLC land requires FC Act permission; broken DLC land may continue with conditions (Paras 4). D) Environmental Law - Requirement of Environmental Clearance - Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Mining operations require environmental clearance; operations without it are illegal (Paras 9). E) Constitutional Law - Writ Petition under Article 32 - Maintainability and Interim Relief - Article 32, Constitution of India - Writ petition alleging violation of fundamental rights due to environmental degradation is maintainable; Court can direct CEC to prepare list of lessees operating illegally and pass interim orders to stop such operations (Paras 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether mining operations in Keonjhar, Sundergarh, and Mayurbhanj districts of Odisha are being conducted in compliance with the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and other relevant laws; whether interim orders should be passed to stop illegal mining and direct the Central Empowered Committee to inquire and report.
Final Decision
The Court upheld maintainability of the writ petition and, finding prima facie that several lessees operated without mandatory clearances, directed CEC to prepare a list of such lessees. Interim orders were passed to ensure compliance with environmental and forest laws. The matter was adjourned for further consideration.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- mining operations require statutory clearances including environmental clearance
- FC Act approval
- and consent from Pollution Control Board
- deemed extension of mining lease does not authorize operation without clearances
- NPV must be paid for entire forest area in mining lease
- unbroken DLC land requires FC Act approval
- broken DLC land may continue with conditions
- writ petition challenging illegal mining maintainable under Article 32
