High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 05 UK CK 0053

SMT. KUNTI PARIHAR vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 11 May 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 776 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 338 words

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

1.

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 in the Court today is taken on record.

2. Petitioner seeks a licence for mining soapstone in District Bageshwar. The case of the petitioner is that though she was given a Letter of Intent

but the final order for grant of a mining lease has not been issued in her favour for the reason that she has not obtained the environmental clearance

from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India. Consequently, vide order dated 17.03.2018, the Letter of Intent

has also been cancelled.Â

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that on the one hand the State Government did not constitute the State Environment Impact Assessment

Authority, while on the other hand it even did not consider the order given under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Removal of

Difficulties Order, 2017. This order reads as under:

“Environmental Clearance.- Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 10A of the Mines and Minerals

(Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 (10 of 2015), it is clarified that where the condition of obtaining environmental clearance has not

been complied with by the applicant on or before 11th January, 2017, but all other conditions specified in previous approval or the letter of intent have

been fulfilled, the applications shall be considered under that section and mining lease shall be granted by the concerned State Governments in

accordance with the notifications issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986):

 Provided that no mining activity shall commence unless and until the applicant obtains environmental clearance as laid down under the Environment

(Protection) Act, 1986 and the rules made there under.â€​Â

4.

Petitioner alleges that the above order has not been considered by the State Government.Â

5.

In view of the above provision, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the State Authorities to reconsider the matter in the light of the

above provision.