Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. (1985) 2 SCC 431

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P.   (1985) 2 SCC 431

indiankanoon.org link

casemine.com link

legitquest.com link

Writ Petns.Nos. 8209 and 8821 of 1983,, decided on 12/03/1985

Headnote

(A) Constitution of India , Art.32— Writ petition – Imbalance to ecology and hazard to healthy environment due to working of lime-stone quarries – Supreme Court ordered their closure.

SC653Ecological balance – PreservationPublic health – Hazard toMinor minerals – Close down of mining operations on count of public health. (Para 7 10 12)

(B) Constitution of India , Art.32— Writ petition – Advocates fee – Advocate of a party rendering valuable assistance to Court in hearing petition – Supreme Court directed the Union Govt.and State Govt., respondents to petition, to pay him 5,000 each as additional remuneration and not in lieu of costs.

Supreme Court Rules (1966) , Sch.II— Advocates Act (25 of 1961) , S.29, S.30— Advocate – Remuneration for rendering valuable assistance to Court.(Para 15)

Judgement

P.N. BHAGWATI, AMARENDRA NATH SEN & RANGANATH MISRA, JJ.

1. This case has been argued at great length before us not only because a large number of lessees of lime stone quarries are involved and each of them has painstakingly and exhaustively canvassed his factual as well as legal points of view but also because this is the first case of its kind in the country involving issues relating to environment and ecological balance and the questions arising for consideration are of grave moment and of significance not only to the people residing in the Mussoorie Hill range forming part of the Himalayas but also in their implications to the welfare of the generality of people living in the country. It brings into sharp focus the conflict between development and conservation and serves to emphasise the need for reconciling the two in the larger interest of the country. But since having regard to the voluminous material placed before us and the momentous issues raised for decision, it is not possible for us to prepare a full and detailed judgment immediately and at the same time, on account of interim order made by us, mining operations carried out through blasting have been stopped and the ends of justice require that the lessees of lime stone quarries should know, without any unnecessary delay, as to where they stand in regard to their lime stone quarries we propose to pass our order on the writ petitions. The reasons for the order will be set out in the judgment to follow later.

2. We had by an Order dated August 11, 1983 appointed a Committee consisting of Shri D.N. Bhargav, Controller General, Indian Bureau of Mines, Nagpur, Shri M.S. Kahlon, Director General of Mines Safety and Col. P. Mishra, Head of the Indian Photo Interpretation Institute (National Remote Sensing Agency) for the purpose of inspecting the lime stone quarries mentioned in the writ petition as also in the list submitted by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. This Committee which we shall hereinafter for the sake of convenience refer to as the Bhargav Committee, submitted three reports after inspecting most of the lime stone quarries and it divided the lime stone quarries into three groups. The lime stone quarries comprised in category A were those where in the opinion of the Bhargav Committee the adverse impact of the mining operations was relatively less pronounced; category B comprised those lime stone quarries where in the opinion of the Bhargav Committee the adverse impact of mining operations was relatively more pronounced and category C covered those lime stone quarries which had been directed to be closed down by the Bhargav Committee under the orders made by us on account of deficiencies regarding safety and hazards of more serious nature.

3. It seems that the Government of India also appointed a Working Group on Mining of Lime Stone Quarries in Dehradun-Mussoorie area, some time in 1983. The Working Group was also headed by the same Shri D.N. Bhargav who was a member of the Bhargav Committee appointed by us. There were five other members of the Working Group along with Shri D.N. Bhargav and one of them was Dr. S. Mudgal who was at the relevant time Director in the Department of Environment, Government of India and who placed the Report of the Working Group before the Court along with his affidavit. The Working Group in its Report submitted in September 1983 made a review of lime stone quarry leases for continuance or discontinuance of mining operations and after a detailed consideration of various aspects recommended that the lime stone quarries should be divided into two categories, namely category 1 and category 2; category 1 comprising lime stone quarries considered suitable for continuance of mining operations and category 2 comprising lime stone quarries which were considered unsuitable for further mining.

4. It is interesting to note that the lime stone quarries comprised in category A of the Bhargav Committee Report were the same lime stone quarries which were classified in category 1 by the Working Group and the lime stone quarries in categories B and C of the Bhargav Committee Report were classified in category 2 of the Report of the Working Group. It will thus be seen that both the Bhargav Committee and the Working Group were unanimous in their view that the lime stone quarries classified in category A by the Bhargav Committee Report and category 1 by the Working Group were suitable for continuance of mining operations. So far as the lime stone quarries in category C of the Bhargav Committee Report are concerned, they were regarded by both the Bhargav Committee and the Working Group as unsuitable for continuance of mining operations and both were of the view that they should be closed down. The only difference between the Bhargav Committee and the Working Group was in regard to lime stone quarries classified in category B. The Bhargav Committee Report took the view that these lime stone quarries need not be closed down, but it did observe that the adverse impact of mining operations in these lime stone quarries was more pronounced, while the Working Group definitely took the view that these lime stone quarries were not suitable for further mining.

6. We shall also examine in detail the question as to whether lime stone deposits act as aquifers or not. But there can be no gainsaying that lime stone quarrying and excavation of the lime stone deposits do seem to affect the perennial water springs. This environmental disturbance has however to be weighed in the balance against the need of lime stone quarrying for industrial purposes in the country and we have taken this aspect into account while making this order.

7. We are clearly of the view that so far as the lime stone quarries classified in category C in the Bhargav Committee Report are concerned which have already been closed down under the directions of the Bhargav Committee, should not be allowed to be operated. If the lessees of these lime stone quarries have obtained any stay order from any court permitting them to continue the mining operations, such stay order will stand dissolved and if there are any subsisting leases in respect of any of these lime stone quarries they shall stand terminated without any liability against the State of Uttar Pradesh. If there are any suits or writ petitions for continuance of expired or unexpired leases in respect of any of these lime stone quarries pending, they will stand dismissed.

8. We would also give the same direction in regard to the lime stone quarries in the Sahasradhara Block even though they are placed in category B by the Bhargav Committee. So far as these lime stone quarries in Sahasradhara Block are concerned, we agree with the Report made by the Working Group and we direct that these lime stone quarries should not be allowed to be operated and should be closed down forthwith. We would also direct, agreeing with the Report made by the Working Group that the lime stone quarries placed in category 2 by the Working Group other than those which are placed in categories B and C by the Bhargav Committee should also not be allowed to be operated and should be closed down save and except for the lime stone quarries covered by mining leases Nos. 31, 36 and 37 for which we would give the same direction as we are giving in the succeeding paragraphs in regard to the lime stone quarries classified as category B in the Bhargav Committee Report.

9. So far as the lime stone quarries classified as category A in the Bhargav Committee Report and/or category 1 in the Working Group Report are concerned, we would divide them into two classes, one class consisting of those lime stone quarries which are within the city limits of Mussoorie and the other consisting of those which are outside the city limits. We take the view that the lime stone quarries falling within category A of the Bhargav Committee Report and/or category 1 of the Working Group Report and falling outside the city limits of Mussoorie, should be allowed to be operated subject of course to the observance of the requirements of the Mines Act, 1952, the Metalliferous Mines Regulations, 1961 and other relevant statutes, rules and regulations. Of course when we say this, we must make it clear that we are not holding that if the leases in respect of these lime stone quarries have expired and suits or writ petitions for renewal of the leases are pending in the courts, such leases should be automatically renewed. It will be for the appropriate courts to decide whether such leases should be renewed or not having regard to the law and facts of each case. So far as the lime stone quarries classified in category A in the Bhargav Committee Report and category 1 in the Working Group Report and falling within the city limits of Mussoorie are concerned, we would give the same direction which we are giving in the next succeeding paragraph in regard to the lime stone quarries classified as category B in the Bhargav Committee Report.

12. The consequence of this Order made by us would be that the lessees of lime stone quarries which have been directed to be closed down permanently under this Order or which may be directed to be closed down permanently after consideration of the Report of the Bandyopadhyay Committee, would be thrown out of business in which they have invested large sums of money and expended considerable time and effort. This would undoubtedly cause hardship to them, but it is a price that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the people to live in healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance and without avoidable hazard to them and to their cattle, homes and agricultural land and undue affectation of air, water and environment. However, in order to mitigate their hardship, we would direct the Government of India and the State of Uttar Pradesh that whenever any other area in the State of Uttar Pradesh is thrown open for grant of lime stone or dolomite quarrying, the lessees who are displaced as a result of this order shall be afforded priority in grant of lease of such area and intimation that such area is available for grant of lease shall be given to the lessees who are displaced so that they can apply for grant of lease of such area and on the basis of such application, priority may be given to them subject, of course, to their otherwise being found fit and eligible. We have no doubt that while throwing open new areas for grant of lease for lime stone or dolomite quarrying, the Government of India and the State of Uttar Pradesh will take into account the considerations to which we have adverted in this order.

13. We are conscious that as a result of this Order made by us, the workmen employed in the lime stone quarries which have been directed to be closed down permanently under this Order or which may be directed to be closed down permanently after consideration of the Report of the Bandyopadhyay Committee, will be thrown out of employment. But the lime stone quarries which have been or which may be directed to be closed down permanently will have to be reclaimed and afforestation and soil conservation programme will have to be taken up in respect of such lime stone quarries and we would therefore direct that immediate steps shall be taken for reclamation of the areas forming part of such lime stone quarries with the help of the already available Eco-Task Force of the Department of Environment, Government of India and the workmen who are thrown out of employment in consequence of this Order shall, as far as practicable and in the shortest possible time, be provided employment in the afforestation and soil conservation programme to be taken up in this area.

14. There are several applications before us for removal of lime stone, dolomite and marble chips mined from the quarries and lying at the site and these applications also are being disposed of by this Order. So far as lime stone quarries classified as category A in the Bhargav Committee Report and/or category 1 in the Working Group Report and falling outside the city limits of Mussoorie are concerned, we have permitted the lessees of these lime stone quarries to carry on mining operations and hence they must be allowed to remove whatever minerals are lying at the site of these lime stone quarries without any restriction whatsoever, save and except those prescribed by any statutes, rules or regulations and subject to payment of royalty. We do not, however, propose to go into the question as to what was the precise quantity of minerals mined by the lessees of these lime stone quarries and lying at the site at the time when these lime stone quarries were closed down under the directions of the Bhargav Committee. We would permit the lessees of these lime stone quarries to remove whatever minerals are found lying at the site or its vicinity, provided of course such minerals are covered by their respective leases and/or quarry permits.

15. Such removal will be carried out and completed by the lessees within four weeks from the date of this Order and it shall be done in the presence of an officer not below the rank of Deputy Collector to be nominated by the District Magistrate, Dehradun, a gazetted officer from the Mines Department nominated by the Director of Mines and a public spirited individual in Dehradun,

* * * * *

Leave a comment