Suresh Kumar vs State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors

This application seeks execution of earlier order of this Tribunal dated 24.05.2021 in O.A No. 107/2021, Suresh Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. as follows:-

“1. Grievance in this matter is against illegal sand mining in ‘submerged water area’ at Khand No. 20/7, village Tikapur, Tehsil Maudaha, District Hamirpur, UP by M/s. Ambey Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. in violation of Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines (SSMMG), 2016 and Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining (EMGSM), 2020 and binding orders of this Tribunal, including order dated 30.05.2017 in O.A. No. 78/2015 (CZ) reported in 2017 SCC OnLine NGT 1097, holding as follows:-

“20. In the light of the above, we answer the question that has been referred to us that no river sand mining is permitted in the submerged area in accordance with the Sustainable Sand Mining Guidelines 2016 alternatively in so far as the issue whether it can be permitted in the submergence areas is concerned our answer to the same is that in submergence area which may be a wider area than the one actually submerged as a submergence area would encompass the full reservoir level of the river or the high flood level of the river recorded by in any case where the mineral is exposed and not in stream such sand mining in accordance with the Sand Mining Guidelines 2016 and the conditions imposed in the environmental clearance may be carried out.”

We have heard learned Counsel for the applicant. The matter is covered by order dated 26.02.2021 in O.A. No. 360/2015, NGT Bar Association v. Virender Singh (State of Gujarat) and other connected matters. Therein, on exhaustive review of the issues relating to sand mining, this Tribunal has issued directions, including the mechanism for enforcement of environmental norms, inter-alia as follows:-

“1to26..xxx……….……………..xxx……………………………………

xxx

We direct all the States/UTs to strictly follow the SSMG-2016 read with EMGSM-2020 reinforced by mechanism for preparation of DSRs (in terms of directions of this Tribunal dated 14.10.2020 in Pawan Kumar, supra and 04.11.2020 in Rupesh Pethe, supra), Environment Management Plans, replenishment studies, mine closure plans, grant of EC (in terms of direction dated 13.09.2018 in Satendra Pandey, supra), assessment and recovery of compensation (as per discussion in Para 25), seizure and release of vehicles involved in illegal mining (in terms of order dated 19.02.2020 in Mushtakeem, supra), other safeguards against violations, grievance redressal, accountability of the designated officers and periodical review at higher levels. As already noted, EMGSM-2020 contemplates extensive use of digital technology, including remote sensing.

We further direct that periodic inspection be conducted by a five-members Committee, headed and coordinated by the SEIAA and comprising CPCB (wherever it has regional office), State PCB and two expert members of SEAC dealing with the subject. Where CPCB regional office is not available, if MoEF&CC regional office is available, its Regional Officer will be included in the Committee. Where neither CPCB nor MoEF&CC regional office exists, Chairman, SEIAA will tie up with the nearest institution of repute such as IIT to nominate an expert for being included in the Committee. Such inspection must be conducted at least thrice for each lease i.e. after expiry of 25% the lease period, then after 50% of the period and finally six months before expiry of the lease period for midway correction and assessment of damage, if any. The reports of such inspections be acted upon and placed on website of the SEIAA. Every lessee, undertaking mining, must have an environment professional to facilitate sustainable mining in terms of the mining plan and environmental norms. This be overseen by the SEIAA. Environment Departments may also develop an appropriate mobile App for receiving and redressing the grievances against the sand mining, including connivance of the authorities and also a mechanism to fix accountability of the concerned officers. Recommendations of the Oversight Committee for the State of UP quoted earlier may be duly taken into account.

The mechanism must provide for review at the level of the Chief Secretary at least once in every quarter, in a meeting with all concerned Departments in the State. The Chief Secretary UP may ensure further action in the light of the report of the Oversight Committee.

Similarly, at National level, such review needs to be conducted atleast once in a year by the Secretary, Environment in coordination with the Secretaries Mining and Jalshakti Ministries the CPCB.”

In view of above, this application stands disposed of with a direction to the Chief Secretary, UP and the District Magistrate, Hamirpur, to look into the matter and take remedial action, following due process of law.”

Vide order dated 11.05.2022, the Tribunal sought a factual report from the District Magistrate, Hamirpur with reference to the allegation that in-stream mining was still continuing.

Accordingly, the District Magistrate has filed report on 13.06.2022 to the effect that mining was no longer continuing as the lease was terminated for failing to pay the requisite installment under Rule 59 of the Uttar Pradesh Mines Mineral (Concession) Rules, 2021. With regard to past violations, compensation has been assessed and recovery certificate issued. Steps are being taken to recover compensation for the past violations.

In view of above, no further order appears to be necessary except that the concerned Authorities may take further action in accordance with law. The Chief Secretary, U.P may also look into the matter in terms of earlier order of the Tribunal.

The Application is disposed of.

A copy of this order be forwarded to the Chief Secretary, U.P and District Magistrate, Hamirpur by email for compliance.