NGT puts Punjab's desilting drive under scanner, stays work at 85 river sites
The order brings into focus allegations that exercise may be a disguised attempt at large-scale commercial mining of sand and gravel
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has raised serious environmental concerns over Punjab government’s ambitious desilting plan covering 85 sites across major rivers, while restraining authorities from commencing work without its permission. The order, which was declared today, has brought into focus allegations that the exercise may be a disguised attempt at large-scale commercial mining of sand and gravel.
The tribunal, while hearing multiple petitions, noted that the Punjab Department of Water Resources had issued tenders for desilting projects involving removal of nearly 187.14 crore cubic feet of silt from rivers, including the Ghaggar, Sutlej, Ravi, Beas, Siswan and Sarsa. These projects span several districts such as SAS Nagar, Ropar, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Pathankot, Hoshiarpur and Mansa, among others.
Petitioners, including village panchayats and individuals, had challenged the tenders alleging that the state is using the term ‘desilting’ to facilitate commercial extraction of minor minerals like sand and gravel. According to them, the scale, financial structure and execution model of the tenders indicate a revenue-driven mining exercise rather than a genuine flood-control measure.
The NGT, headed by Chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava, observed that while the tendering process may continue, no actual desilting work can begin without prior approval of the tribunal. This interim restriction remains significant as the state had already floated several tenders and initiated procedural steps.
The tribunal also examined the environmental implications of such large-scale riverbed intervention. Petitioners argued that excessive extraction could irreversibly damage river ecology, alter river morphology, reduce groundwater recharge and increase flood risks. They further contended that the proposed quantities far exceed natural replenishment rates, citing scientific studies indicating limited sediment recovery in Punjab’s rivers.
Another major contention raised was the absence of mandatory environmental clearances. As per the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, mining activities, including extraction of minor minerals require prior environmental approval. The applicants alleged that the state bypassed these requirements by classifying the activity as desilting, which is exempt only when carried out strictly for maintenance or disaster management purposes.
The tribunal acknowledged that if desilting is being used as a pretext for commercial mining, it would amount to a “colourable exercise of power” and violate environmental regulations. It also highlighted the need to adhere to the Sustainable Sand Mining Guidelines, which mandate scientific studies, replenishment assessments and strict monitoring before allowing extraction.
During the proceedings, the Punjab government defended its actions, stating that the desilting exercise is aimed at flood prevention and increasing river carrying capacity. It informed the tribunal that revenues generated from the tenders would be used to support flood protection works across the state.
The state also raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing that similar issues are pending before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. However, the NGT rejected this contention, clarifying that the current petitions relate to fresh tender notices issued after October 2025, which are not under challenge before the High Court.
The tribunal further noted that out of the 85 identified sites, tenders for several locations had already been floated, while others were still in the pipeline. Despite this, no physical work has been carried out due to the interim stay order.
The Supreme Court had earlier directed the Punjab government to approach the NGT for relief and present all relevant facts, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The case will come up for further hearing after completion of pleadings, with the tribunal expected to examine whether the projects comply with environmental norms or constitute illegal mining under the guise of river maintenance.
