PRANAV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition raises an important issue i.e. as to whether a mining lease holder, who was granted mining lease of an area less than 5 hectares prior to the judgment of the apex Court in Deepak Kumar Etc. vs State Of Haryana & Ors.Etc., 2012 4 SCC 629(dated 27.2.2012) by which restriction of getting an environmental clearance has been imposed on lease for an area less than 5 hectares, is entitled to carry on his mining operation without obtaining any environmental clearance as required under the provisions of the Environment (Protection ) Act, 1986.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are; a mining lease in accordance with the provisions of the U. P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 for an area of 9 acres (3.64 hectares) of plot no. 3 Gha, village Manikpur was executed in favour of the respondent no. 5 for the period 23.7.2012 to 22.2.2022 on 23.2.2012 for sand stone (Imarati Patthar). The Apex Court delivered judgment in Deepak Kumar's case on 27.7.2012 directing that lease of minor minerals including renewal for an area of less than 5 hectares be granted only after getting the environmental clearance. The Government of India also issued an order on 18.5.2012 directing that in order to ensure compliance of the apex Court order in Deepak Kumar's case, it has now been decided that all mining projects of minor minerals irrespective of the size of the lease would henceforth require prior environment clearance. Mining projects with lease area up to less than 50 hectares would be treated as category 'B' as defined in the EIA Notification 2006.

(3.) Complaints were filed by the villagers of village Manikpur including the petitioner making complaints that carrying out mining operations by the respondent no. 5 of sand stone in plot No. 3 Kha is causing irreparable loss to the environment. The State Government has issued a Government order dated 10.9.2012 referring to the notification dated 14.9.2006 providing that mining operations which could not take place on account of non receipt of environmental clearance may obtain environmental clearance in accordance with the notification dated 14.9.2006 within two months. On 13.3.2013 Sub Divisional Magistrate Lalganj, Mirzapur referring to the application submitted by the petitioner in which complaint was made against the mining operation of the respondent no. 5 directed for stoppage of mining operations. The order further mentions a joint survey dated 13.3.2013 by which it was revealed that mining operation is increasing pollution. The respondent no. 5 filed a writ petition No. 18359 of 2013 challenging the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. This Court by interim order dated 11.4.2013 stayed the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The District Collector was directed to review the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and was directed to pass an appropriate order afresh. The District Magistrate in pursuance of the order of this Court passed a detailed order dated 13.5.2013 taking into consideration the inspection and survey reports . He recorded his five conclusions on the basis of the report. One of the conclusions recorded by the District Magistrate was that for mining operation environmental clearance has not been obtained. By order dated 13.5.2013, the representation submitted by the respondent no. 5 was disposed of. The petitioner aggrieved by the order passed by the District Magistrate dated 13.5.2013 has come up in this writ petition. In this writ petition following prayers have been made by the petitioner :