MOHD DILSHAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a public interest litigation launched by the petitioner being concerned by the mining being done contrary to law. Very briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is a public spirited citizen. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued direction in T.N. Godavarman Thurumulpad vs. Union of India, 2010 13 SCC 740 prohibiting mining activities within 1 km from the boundary of National Park and Reserves. The Government of India issued Notification under the Environment (Protection) Act on 14.09.2006. Therein, it is provided that prior environmental clearance would be necessary before commencement of the mining. It is stated that, according to the Schedule to the Notification, there are two Authorities. The Authority at the Central level is empowered to deal with the cases falling under the category 'A'.

(2.) IT has now been decided that the following procedure shall be adopted in dealing with such cases.

(3.) IT is further case of the petitioner that the 1st respondent has declared 10 km stretch from Rajaji National Park as an EcoSensitive Zone, in which the commercial mining is strictly prohibited. There is reference to communication dated 09.09.2013, wherein mining activity in less than 5 hectares was also brought within the ambit of evaluation at the Central level. It is the complaint of the petitioner that respondent no.3 / State Environment Impact Assessment Authority through its Secretary issued an erroneous order on the wrong interpretation of the Notification of the year 2013. It is the case of the petitioner that the Notification dated 09.09.2013 does not have applicability on the issue of No Objection to be taken from the National Board as per the proceedings dated 02.12.2009, which we have adverted to earlier. It is further case of the petitioner that respondent no.3 colluded with the lease holders and, accordingly, the petitioner is before us seeking relief against the illegal mining and following are the prayers: