AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The State has filed an action taken report and learned Advocate-General points out that several amendments have been made to the Meghalaya Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016 to plug the loopholes that existed.
While it is appreciated that the State makes a clean breast of the earlier mistakes in the said Rules of 2016, the petitioner maintains that the illegal mining of limestone continues unabated even though the State has no authority to grant any permission for any limestone quarrying since limestone is a major mineral and, only in the exceptional case when
limestone is used in kilns for manufacturing of lime as building material, would limestone would be regarded as a minor mineral. According to the petitioner, on the basis of the permits or permissions issued or granted by the State, influential persons are carrying on regular business in limestone and selling the limestone to parties in Bangladesh or even to cement manufacturers in Meghalaya and nearby States.
Since the allegation of limestone being extracted and openly sold with the State permission has not been squarely levelled in the original petition, it will be open to the petitioner to use a supplementary affidavit to indicate the petitioner’s perception as to the present position in such regard.
In the meantime, whether or not the loopholes have been plugged as submitted by the State, the State should ensure that no extraction of limestone is permitted without obtaining appropriate sanction under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
Let this matter appear three weeks hence.
List on May 31, 2022.