1 DBCWP (PIL) No.9282/2011 DBCWP (PIL) No.6785/2011 18 & 19

1. D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.9282/2011 Babu Lal Jaju & Anr. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

2. D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.6785/2011 Sajjan Sodhani & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.

DATE OF ORDER: 22nd March 2013.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. S. SIRADHANA Mr. Tribhuvan Gupta ] Mr. Usman Gani ], for the petitioners.

Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate & Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Jamvant Gurjar Mr. V.K. Mathur Mr. Sunil Beniwal Mr. Manish Shishodia Mr. P.S. Bhati Mr. Ravindra Singh, for the respective respondents.

<><><> These two petitions have been filed as Public Interest Litigation ['PIL'] essentially contending against the mining activities at the area comprised in Quarry License No.468/2010 near village Menal, Tehsil Begun, District Chittorgarh, which has been granted to M/s. Menal Balaji Stone, arrayed as respondent No.8 in CWP No.9282/2011 and as respondent No.7 in CWP No.6785/2011.

The sum and substance of the cause as projected and the grievance as stated in these petitions is that the mining operation at the area in question contravenes the requirements of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 ['the 2 DBCWP (PIL) No.9282/2011 DBCWP (PIL) No.6785/2011 Act of 1958'] read with the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959; and is directly causing danger to an ancient monument, popularly known as Mahanal Temple. It has also been suggested that the activities of the private respondent are not in conformity with the other regulatory laws including the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 ['the Act of 1986'] and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 ['the Act of 1981']. A suggestion about the area in question falling within the prohibited zone from the boundary of the National Highway No.76 has also been made.

It is borne out from the records that having considered these petitions at the motion stage on 13.10.2011, this Court ordered issuance of notice to the different parties and, in view of the objections raised by the Archaeological Survey of India, directed the respondents to stop the questioned mining activities forthwith. It is an admitted position of all the parties that the mining activities at the area in question have remained stalled for all this time.

Separate replies have been filed in these petitions on behalf of the Archaeological Survey of India, Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, Mining Department of the Government of Rajasthan, National Highways Authority of India and the private respondent-the licensee.

After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record, we find the following relevant features in these matters:-

(i) The Archaeological Survey of India has already issued a notice dated 23.12.2010 under Section 19 of the Act of 1958, the 3 DBCWP (PIL) No.9282/2011 DBCWP (PIL) No.6785/2011 contents whereof are reproduced verbatim as under: -

"इस क र लर कक ज नक र ल र गर ह क श मकश पत श पम चन म ण ,ग व मन ल,जजल चचत$डगढ क द र कन( र सरक र द र सर) क+त सम रक मह न ल मजन र क पक र व ल क प स स)रक+त +त क प.व व उतर द श म आपक द र खनन क क र करन हत 25 ब4ग जम न ललज पर खनन करन क ललर चचत$डगढ म ईननग ववभ ग स सव क:त ल गई ह,ज; क "प च न स)सम रक तथ पर ततव र सथल ए)व अवशष अचAननरम ,1958"कक A र 19(1)तथ " प च न स)सम रक तथ पर ततव र सथल एव) अवशष ननरम,1959 एव) स)शBचAत एव) वचAकरण एकD 2010 क प वA न ल ग. ह;त ह। इस अचAननरम क द र ककस भ कन( र स)रक+त सथल अथव सम रक कक स म क च रF तरफ क नर.नतम 100 म Dर क +त क; पनतवषद +त ककर गर ह। तथ उस स पर 200 म Dर क +त क;

ववनरलमत +त म न ह, इस +त मH ककस भ पक र क खनन क क र व ननम ण/नव ननम ण क क र प.णतर पनत4)चAत ह एव) स)जर अपर A क शण क आत ह। च ह वह ल;क पररर;जन ह करF न ह;। इस +त म ककस पक र क खनन क र व ननम ण/नव ननम ण हत भ रत र पर ततव सवK+णा स प.व नमनत प प करत आवशरक ह।

अत;श मकश पत श पम चन म ण ,सर) क+त सम रक मह न ल मजन र क प स सर) क+त +त क वजजत तथ ननर)बतत +त म ककस भ पक र क खनन क र नह ) कर वH अनरथ 'प च न स)सम रक सम रक एव) पर तव र सथल अवशष अचAननरम 1958 क A र 19(2)क अनतगत इस ववभ ग द र ननरम नस र क रव ह क ज वग तथ इसस ह;न व ल +नत क सवम) जजमम र ह;ग। तथ पव नमनत क ललर उप-मणडल क र लर स पपत लकर उचचत क रव ह हत पवषत करH ।"

(ii)It is an admitted position that the licensee has filed a reply to the above-referred notice and has also applied for the requisite No Objection Certificate ['NOC'] to the concerned authority.

(iii)It is further borne out from the records that the State Pollution Control Board earlier granted to the licensee the consent "to establish" and then, the consent "to operate" on 14.12.2010 and 06.01.2011 respectively. The Officers of the Board carried out an inspection of the mining unit on 13.02.2011 and after drawing of an inspection report, the Board issued two notices, on 14.02.2011 4 DBCWP (PIL) No.9282/2011 DBCWP (PIL) No.6785/2011 and 24.03.2011 respectively, calling upon the licensee to show cause against the intended revocation of consent under the Act of 1981 and the intended prosecution under the Act of 1986.

(iv)It is also an admitted position that the licensee has submitted reply to above-referred notices too; and the proceedings thereunder are pending.

(v)So far as the National Highways Authority of India is concerned, it has been specifically given out that the area in question does not fall within the regulated or prohibited zone of the boundary of National Highway No. 76.

In the ultimate analysis, it turns out that the proceedings before the Archaeological Survey of India as also before the State Pollution Control Board are pending; and they cover essentially all the relevant aspects of the cause espoused and grievance suggested in these petitions.

Having regard to the position noticed above, we are of the considered view that when the concerned authorities are already seized of the matter, they should be permitted to take considered decision in the pending matters after extending opportunity of hearing to all the concerned. Therefore, there does not appear any reason to continue with these petitions as PIL any further; and we consider it appropriate to leave it open for the authorities concerned to proceed in accordance with law.

However, when it is noticed that the interim order as passed on 13.10.2011 has hitherto continued and the Archaeological Survey of India in its notice dated 23.10.2010 has specifically prohibited 5 DBCWP (PIL) No.9282/2011 DBCWP (PIL) No.6785/2011 carrying out of mining operations at the prohibited and the regulated area; and obviously, such prohibition is to continue until decision in the matter on the prayer of NOC as made by the licensee, it would be in the fitness of things that the interim order passed by this Court on 13.10.2011 be made absolute and operative with the modification that the respondents shall not carry out any mining activities at the area it has been restrained from by the said notice dated 23.12.2010 until conclusion of the pending proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

These petitions stand disposed of with the observations and directions foregoing while leaving it open for all the parties to take recourse to the appropriate remedies in accordance with law. No costs.

(V. S. SIRADHANA),J. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. cpgoyal//-

DBCWP (PIL) No.9282/2011 DBCWP (PIL) No.6785/2011 D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.6785/2011 Sajjan Sodhani & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.

DATE OF ORDER: 22nd March 2013.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. S. SIRADHANA Mr. Tribhuvan Gupta ] Mr. Usman Gani ], for the petitioners.

Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate & Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Jamvant Gurjar, Mr. V.K. Mathur Mr. Sunil Beniwal Mr. Manish Shishodia Mr. P.S. Bhati Mr. Ravindra Singh, for the respective respondents.

<><><> This petition stands disposed of [vide common order made in D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.9282/2011: Babu Lal Jaju & Anr. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.] (V. S. SIRADHANA),J. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J.

cpgoyal//-