Don’t give final nod for mining in Aravalli hills till further orders: SC tells Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Delhi
New Delhi, May 9
Asserting that the Aravalli hills have to be protected, the Supreme Court on Thursday directed the governments of Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Delhi not to give final permission for mining activities in the entire range until further orders.
“We are passing this order for all the four states (through which the hill range runs… Until further orders, though all the states wherein Aravalli ranges are situated would be at liberty to consider and process application for grant of mining leases… and also for renewal thereof, but no final permission shall be granted for mining in the Aravalli hills as defined in the FSI (Forest Survey of India) report, a Bench led by Justice BR Gavai said.
The Bench – which also included Justice AS Oka, however, clarified that the order was restricted only to mining in the Aravalli hills and its ranges. The order shall in no way be construed as prohibiting legal mining activities which were already being carried out in accordance with valid permits and licences, it added.
Noting the submissions of amicus curiae K Parameshwar, the top court said until further orders no fresh mining leases or renewal of existing mining leases shall be permitted in the Aravalli ranges in the states of Rajasthan and Haryana.
The Bench, however, said, a total ban on mining activities was not conducive even from the point of view of environment as it would lead to illegal mining.
The order came after a report submitted by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) pointed out various illegal mining activities carried out throughout the state of Rajasthan and district-wise details have also been given with regard to the area under illegal mining.
“We find that the issue with regard to the mining activities in the Aravalli hills needs to be addressed jointly by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) as well all the four states — Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, state of Rajasthan, state of Haryana and state of Gujarat,” it said.
Noting that there were certain issues with regard to illegal mining as well as mining under the permissions granted by the states, the Bench pointed out that one of the major issues was about different definitions of Aravalli hills and ranges adopted by various states.
Ordering constitution of a committee to arrive at a uniform definition of the Aravalli hills and ranges, it asked the committee comprising, among others, the Secretary of MoEF&CC, the secretaries of forest of all these four states and one representative each of the FSI and CEC, to submit its report in two months and posted the matter for further hearing in August.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Haryana, Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, representing Rajasthan, and an advocate for the federation of associations of mining in Rajasthan opposed the suggestion of the amicus curiae.
Millions of labourers were dependent on the mining activities carried out in these states, and if such an order is passed, it will have a cascading effect on their livelihood, they submitted.
