PARYAVARAN BACHAV SAMITY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition [Public Interest Litigation] is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner Paryavaran Bachav Samity, a charitable trust registered under Bombay Public Trust Act and also under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. The main object of the Trust, as per the constitution of the Trust, is to create awareness about environment and to take steps and undertake activities for maintenance of the environment. In this writ petition, rights of local citizens of villages Rampara, Bhetali, Kukaras and Anandpara are sought to be protected as the respondent No.13 Gujarat Ambuja Cement Co. Ltd. has grossly violated the terms and conditions of the lease granted by the State Government for mining purpose. It is the case of the petitioner that due to illegal mining of limestone and other minerals by respondent No.13 a few hundred crores of value of mineral was excavated in collusion with officers of Department of Revenue, Collector, Geology and Mining, etc. and also committed breach of various provisions of State and Central Act viz. Gujarat Panchayat Act, Environment Protection Act, Water [Prevention and Control of Pollution] Act, 1974, Mines, and Minerals [Regulation and Development] Act, 1957 and Rules made thereunder.

(2.) Mr. N.M.Kapadia, learned counsel for the petitioner, has taken this court through various averments made in this petition and submitted that it is necessary for the Government agency to file criminal case under Sections 378 to 380 of the Indian Penal Code and further upon representations made by the petitioner, competent authority of Department of Geology and Mining, State of Gujarat issued notice to respondent No.13 for recovery of Rs.4,95,81,840/. It is further submitted that the above measure is not adequate, and therefore, this Court may appoint SubCommittee to examine the extent of damage caused by the company to agriculturists and environment and matter should be referred to concerned Collector and Gujarat Pollution Control Board and appropriate order in this regard may be passed accordingly.

(3.) Upon issuance of notice, respondent Government authorities and respondent No.13 have filed replies, wherein the allegations levelled by the petitioner are denied and it is submitted that issue of illegal excavation of mineral is already settled and the company has compounded the matter by paying Rs.4,95,81,840/ in the year 2009 and the compromise was entered into with the Government which is legal and valid. The respondent No.13 has also doubted motive and intention of the petitioner that just to harass and threaten the respondent with a view to receive reward @10% of the recovery amount as stated in his notice, the petitioner has filed this petition. It is further submitted that no mining activity is carried out after 2008, however, with regard to appointment of any committee for verification, it was left to the discretion of this court to issue any direction, as may be deemed fit and proper.