Environmental Laws:

 Environment (Protection) Act, 1986/Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974/Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 19741 Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980/Constitution of India, 1950; Article 21:

Writ petition for stopping mining activity in the vicinity of Delhi-Haryana border on ground of environmental degradation-Issuance of directions by the Supreme Court to Expert Environment Agencies/Institutions to suggest ways and means for preventing and controlling pollution in the sensitive ecological region of the border area-Compliance thereto by the authorities concerned to control mining operations in the area to the extent it adversely affects local habitants in general and environment in particular-Authorities concerned issuing notifications/taking remedial measures-On consideration/examination of reports/recommendations/notifications and reports of action taken by the authorities, petitions disposed of the with directions. 

Forest Policy-Mining and industrial development-Held: Permission for mining activity should not be granted without appraisal of proper Mine Management Plan from the environmental angle and enforcing it strictly. 

Forest Land-Mining activity-Grant of-Held: It should be examined in the light of principle of sustainable development and can be permitted to continue so long as environment is not affected adversely-However, it should not be allowed on the forest land ear-marked for afforestation/plantation from foreign funds. 

Mining Activity-Grant of permission-Conditions-Held: Right to live includes right of enjoyment of pollution free air and water-Mining operations impairs ecological and natural resources-Utmost good faith and honesty on the part of the /ease-holders are pre-requisite for preventing and considering environmental degradation-They should disclose the probable effect of the activity in polluting the environment to the authorities concerned before seeking permission to carry on the same.

Ground water resources-Preservation of-Held: Water shed management/rain water harvesting/other methods of conservation of water resources and provisions thereto should be made-Funds should be created for eco-restoration in the region-Continuous inspection should be carried out to ensure compliance with the requirements for sustainable development-If due to mining activity water level is touched, it should be stopped and Monitoring Committee has to carve out the area. 

Notifications:

Notification dated May 7, 1992-Effect of-No mining activity could be permitted in the area under plantation in Aravalli project in order to protect the ecology of the Aravalli region. 

Notification dated January 27, 1994-Scope of-Held: No mining operation could be commenced/renewed without Environment Impact Assessment having been done and clearance obtained from the Central Government.

Notification dated November 29, 1999-Scope of-Held: It stipulates preparation of master plan integrating the environmental concerns and future land use-It has to be modified so as to indicate proposed restoration to compensate in lieu of environmental degradation and also to indicate restoration programmes.

Role of Regulatory Authorities:

Role of State Pollution Control Board/Ministry of Environment and Forest/Forest Department-Held: They should undertake regular monitoring of the mining activity to check and assess an ambient air and water quality and other environmental protection measures-MOEF should monitor the eco-restoration efforts and to render technological supports thereto-Monitor implementation of recommendations by the expert institutions-Arouse public awareness-Monitoring Committee constituted to undertake the assigned task-Grant of renewal of mining lease should be effected only after ensuring compliance of the norms, public standard and safeguards-Act of negligence/ connivance on the part of the authority should be viewed seriously and principle of accountability should be followed-Forest Department could carry out afforestation on behalf of the mine-operators-The directions should also be followed in respect of mining activity in Faridabad district in public interest.

Rules/provisions-Inadequacy of-Held: Rules need to be made for levying charges for dump removal/ecological restoration-Appropriate technology need to be used for mining operations/mining land use and mining decomposing. 

Disputes relating to non-payment of royalty-Held: May be adjudicated by the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

The petitions on environmental degradation due to mining activity were considered by the Supreme Court earlier, and it directed the Haryana State Pollution Control Board vide its order dated 20th November, 1995 to inspect and ascertain the impact of mining operations on the Batkal Lake and Suraj Kund, which are ecologically sensitive areas. The Board recommended that the Environmental Management Programme (EMP) should be prepared by Mine Lease Holders and become operative only after obtaining approval from the State Pollution Control Department/ Board. It also recommended stoppage of mining activities within the radius of 5 Kms. from the specified area. The State Government had stopped mining operations in the prescribed areas. The mine-operators/lease holders raised objections and the matter was again considered by the Supreme Court, and the Court vide its order dated April 12, l 996 sought expert opinion from National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) on the point whether the mining operations in the said area are required to be stopped in the interest of environmental protection, pollution control and tourist development. On consideration of the Reports submitted by NEERI, this Court came to the findings, that the mining activities in the vicinity of tourist resorts casting serious impact on the local ecology; that in order to preserve environment and control pollution within the vicinity of the tourist resorts, it was necessary to stop mining activities within 2 Km. radius of these resorts; that Haryana Pollution Control Board to enforce all the recommendations as contained in Para 6.1 of the Report; that failing to comply with the recommendations made would result in the closure of the mining operations; and that the renewal of permission for mining activity shall not be granted without obtaining prior No Objection Certificate from the authorities concerned.

In the meanwhile, an Interim Application has been filed by the Delhi Ridge Management Board for direction to stop mining activities and pumping of water to protect the Asola Bhatti Wild Life Sanctuary and the ridge in the interest of maintaining ecological balance in the area. This Court directed the Government of Haryana to stop all mining activities and pumping of groundwater in and around the specified area. The matter was considered further by this Court and vide its order dated 22nd July, 2002, it directed the Environmental Pollution Central Authority (EPCA) to give a report in regard to environmental pollution in the area after making a personal visit without any advance notice. EPCA visited the sites where alleged mining activities were going on and submitted a detailed report. When the report came up for consideration, some of the leaseholders complained that their mines had not been inspected by the Committee. The Court directed the Committee to carry out the inspection of these mines as well. The Committee visited these mines and submitted another report. 

The Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, issued a Notification dated May 7, 1992 issued under Section 3(2), Clause (5) of the Environment Protection Act r/w Rule 5 of the Rules having bearing on the aspect of mining in the Aravalli Hills whereby all new mining operations including renewal of mining lease have been prohibited. The Notification also sets out procedure for taking prior permission before undertaking any mining activity in the specified area. The powers vested in the Central Government by virtue of the said notification were delegated to the State Government by issuing notification dated November 29, 1999 by the Central Government. Subsequently, the power delegated to State Government has been withdrawn by the Central Government in terms of notification dated 28th February, 2003. The Central Government issued another notification on January 27, 1994, which stipulated that expansion or modernization of any activity (if the pollution load exceeded the existing one) or a new project listed in Schedule 1 of the notification shall not be undertaken in any part of India unless it has been accorded environmental clearance by the Central Government. Though the notification made Environment Impact Assessment mandatory but the Ministry of Environment and Forests did not carry out such assessment in respect of any of the mining lease in the area. However, the lease holders had applied for Environment Impact Assessment in terms of this Court's order dated 6th May, 2002.

The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) was constituted by the Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests for the purpose of monitoring and ensuring compliance of the orders of this Court on the subject matter of forests and Wild life and ancillary issues. Since then the Committee has submitted three reports for consideration by the Court. Further, this Court vide its order dated 31st October, 2002 has directed that no mining activity could be carried out without remedial measures taking place and for this purpose it is necessary that environment impact assessment is done before any mining activity could be permitted.

The main question which arose in these writ petitions is as to whether the mining activity in an area up to 5 Kms. from the Delhi-Haryana Border on the Haryana side of the ridge and also in the Aravalli hills caused environmental degradation. Other aspects to be examined includes as to whether the compliance of the conditions imposed by the Pollution Boards while granting No Objection Certificate for mining as also compliance of various statutory provisions and notifications and obtaining of the necessary clearances and permission from the concerned authorities before starting the mining activity.

It was contended by the lease-holders that the order dated 6th May, 2002, passed by this Court should not be given effect to; that the National Forest Policy itself contem plates for mining operations in forest area; and that pollution, if any, as generated due to mining activities did not traverse beyond the distance of 1Km. and therefore stoppage of mining operations upto a distance of 5 Kms. was wholly unjustified.

State of Delhi, one of the respondents, submitted that the mining activities in the specified areas should be stopped in compliance with this Court's order dated 6th May, 2002; and that all the mining activities and the pumping of mining water in and around the area upto 5 Kms. from Delhi-Haryana border should be prohibited.