Mining Law and Environment Law 1995

SCC Online Web Edition, © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd.
Page 1 Thursday, September 22, 2022

Printed For: Abhishek Charan, SCC Online MyLOFT Remote Access
SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com
© 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 JILI (1995) 431
Mining and Environment: Indian Law Scenario
MINING AND ENVIRONMENT: INDIAN LAW SCENARIO

by
C.M. Jariwala*
I Introduction
THE FRONTIERS of the mining stress areas in India are expanding1 If we go north
to Mussoorie, Dehradun Valley, the mines have covered an area of 40 sq. kms. The
well known Singrauli coal mines arc spread in 220 sq. kms. involving two states, i.e,
Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Piadesh. And going down south, in particular Goa, 50,000
ha. of forest land is destroyed by the indiscriminate mining activities. The major states
affected by the mining activities are Rajasthan and Bihar. However, the States of
Karnalaka, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh and some of the other
slates are also given place on the map of mining activities in India.
The Government of India has been making a tall claim of extracting large quantities
of minerals helping on the one hand the developmental process, and on the other,
earning foreign exchange. It is taking the proud privilege of becoming one of the
larger/largest producers of coal, mica, bauxite and other mineral resources.2 But the
Reference Annual published by the Government of India does not portray any
corresponding picture about the state of environment in and around mine areas. Does
it not retard the growth of the nascent fundamental right3 to environmental
information? There are reports and researches which tell a very sad story of the state
of affairs in and around the mine areas.4
Page: 432
II Ill effects of mining activities

It is true that mines have made an important contribution by giving valuable
minerals and other natural resources to the developing industrialised India. Further,
the minerals extracted have played changing roles from the objects of adornment for
God and Goddesses, commercial commodities to materials for multi-purpose uses. If
we celebrate such developments then we live in the world of myth. The other side of
mining activities have to their credit a large number of sufferings, miseries and
innumerable sad stories. A brief account of adverse effect of mining activities on the
components of environment may be given to find out the direction of the balance
sheet of the profit and loss to the Indian environment. Starting with the human health
of persons working in mines and living around the mines, the mining activities have
caused many diseases: blood hemolysis, aveolar lipoproteinosis, lung firosis,
pneumoconiosis, tuberculosis, persistent cough, respiratory, opthalmie, and ear drum
problems, abortion, stillbirth, infertility and what not.5 Man's habitat is disturbed and
particularly displacement of the tribals and idivasis who are an inseparable part of
nature. There are reports that thousands of people were displaced from the mining
areas and at times a large number of villages were evacuated.6 The greenery, flora and
fauna have not been spared. The rare species of plants and wildlives have been driven
almost to the verge of extinction The Report of the Working Group of the Department
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
of Environment has given an extensive offshoot of mining activities in and around the
mines. The Report concentrates on four pollutions. water, air, noise and soil.7 So,
where lies the balance? Can it not be said that the mad race of India to get the status
of developed state has allowed development to badly supersede the environment.
Table I below narrates the entire journey of the mining activities in a nutshell.
III Directions of law and justice
In this gloomy scenario of the Indian environment, we may examine the goals
before the state and efforts made by the legislature and judiciary and what directions
emerge out of the above exercises. And this will finally bring us to the closing point of:
How best can we evolve a friendly approach between the development and
environment?
Page: 433
TABLE I
Environmental impact of opencast coal mining and allied activities
(1) General
So far as the state is concerned, it is under two obligations, viz., (i) constitutional
obligation—article 48A8 —to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the
forests and wild life of the country, interpreted by the Rajasthan High Court to give
birth to the right to live in a clean environment;9 and (ii) the fundamental duty—this
is emerging from the judicial activism under article 21 of the Constitution of India,
wherein the High Courts and Supreme Court10 developed time and again the right to
environment. Apart from these obligations, Part IV of
Page: 434
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the Constitution of India also provides other obligations which in short include, 0) the
operation of economic system does not result in common detriment (article 39(c));
07) the health of weaker section is not abused (article 39(e)); (;77) public assistance
in case of sickness and disablement (article 42); (iv) just and human condition of work
(article 42); (v) living wages (article 43); and last, but not the least, (vi) to improve
public health (article 47).
This brings us to the next question: Whose babies are mine, environment and
public health? At the legislative level there is no common mother. The regulation and
development of mines and minerals of labour and safety in mines are given to
Parliament (List 1, Entries 53, 54 and 55) and rest of the power is with the state
legislature (List II, Entry 23). Environment is an exclusive power of Parliament under
article 248.11 And public health is the exclusive state subject (List II, Entry 6). There
are other related matters which are also distributed between the Centre and states
which, for example, include, (0 agriculture, water and land are state subjects (List II,
Entries 14, 17 and 18); and 07) forest and protection of wild animals and birds are
concurrent subjects (List III, Entries 17A and 17. B). When we come to the executive
level, there are separate ministries for example, of health, agriculture, coal, mines,
environment forest and labour, etc. The above survey shows that mining activity is
under the control of multiple legislative and governmental authorities. In this separate
ministerial regimes one may recall the dismaying fight between the ministers for
development versus environment.
(2) Legislative approach
Coming to the legislations on mines, during the British Raj before the Mines
Regulations the workers were considered as chattels and the whole concentration was
on maximum extraction of minerals to earn maximum profits out of the private mines.
The Mines Regulations and the British policies from 1877 down to 1900, apart from
profit and revenues to the state, also, concentrated on the export of precious minerals
out of India. In this commercialised world negligible attention was paid to the
condition ot the mine workers. The most pitiable condition was that of minors and
women who were paid one tenth and one third respectively of the man's wages. It was
from 1923 to 1930, a period of labour unrest when the general labour laws showed a
change from rigid to soft or liberal approach towards the labour class. And this is the
reason that the mine legislations before swaraj showed many concessions in favour of
the mine workers so as to improve their working conditions, including the maximum
working hours, minimum wages, creation of the mines labour welfare fund, medical
and other facilities. The minimum age for employment in mines was increased to 15
years. In 1937 employment of women in the mines was prohibited but in view of war,
it was withdrawn in 1943 but was rcimposed in 1946.
The mining laws of ‘India, that is Bharat did not start with a clean state, rather their
infrastructure was based on the existing framework to the ‘British Raj’ legislations. The
vision of the Indian legislature, from the commencement of the Constitution of India
until three and a half decades there alter, was confined to the
Page: 435
labour welfare measures only. The history of Indian mine laws from the first Mines Act
1952 down to 1986 and the Mines Regulations framed thereunder from time to time
support the above conclusion. In these legislative exercises the expression
environment did not find any specific place.
However, there were provisions for the protection of health of persons involved in
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mining processes in mines which included, (i) proper ventilation system; (ii)
protective equipments and improved methods of mining; (iii) dust barriers; (iv)
periodic medical examination of the workers; (v) waste disposal; (vi) no fouling or
polluting stream or spring, etc. The Oil Mines Regulations 1984, regulations 91, 94 and
96 imposed three responsibilities on the mine owners, viz., (i) to take precaution to
reduce noise pollution in mines; (ii) the trade effluent shall not endanger public health
or contaminate fresh water; and (iii) the mine workers shall be properly educated. But
these provisions show one thing that the mining laws only cared for the men inside
the mine and neglected the other components of environment and their inter-
relationship with mining activities.
It was only on the 100th birth anniversary of the mining law that specific provisions
relating to environmental protection started finding a place in such legislation. The
first long exercise was made in 1986 when the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and
Development) (Amendment) Act in its rule making provision enumerated, first, the
rehabilitation of flora destroyed either in the same area or some other area as the state
may direct. The drawback of this provision is that fauna and tribal and adhivasis were
left out. Second, casual approach is visible when instead of compensating the outside
barren land the state was authorised to direct to compensate other land. There was no
time limit fixed for compensating the losses and any inordinate delay in the matter
could degrade the environment further.
The Mines Concession Rules 1987 took the environment protection still further. They
made two provisions, i.e., first the state shall assess the danurge done to the land but
they did not lay down any mathematics of the environmental impact and further, it
was not land alone which was adversely affected but the other components of
environment also polluted which should have been given a place in the rules. Second,
the owner of mines was to compensate from his own pocket for loss to the greenary by
planting double the number of trees destroyed. This rule, it is submitted, will not
apply to mining activities on the land which was already barren before the process
commenced. Rut this interpretation will not be in a correct perspective to improve the
environment of that place. Lastly, the present rules did not provide for any monitoring
agency on such compensatory measures.
The third important exercise was the Mineral (Conservation and Development)
Rules, enforced with effect from 24 October 1988 which added a new chapter on
‘Environment’ covering topics including the protection of environment, phased
reclamation and rehabilitation of lands and restoration of flora, precautions against air,
water and noise pollution. The Rules further provided that every holder of prospecting
license shall, within sixty days from the date of execution of the license, submit, to the
Controller General and Regional Controller, Indian Bureau of Mines a scheme of
prospecting which shall indicate, inter
Page: 436
alia, the baseline information of prevailing environmental conditions before the

operation and the environmental management plan aiming at minimising the adverse
effects of prospecting operations on the environment. Thus the present rules provided
for a detailed environmental auditing of the proposed losses and gains at the
prospecting stage. It may be noted that during the above period of the mining laws,
parallel developments were taking place in the field of Indian environmental law,12 the
water pollution law 1974, the air pollution law 1981 and the environmental protection
law 1986 which prevent and control the pollution of stream, the atmospheric pollution,
and the environmental pollution respectively. There are provisions under sections 60,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
52 and 24 (1) of these Acts respectively which say that the above specified
environmental laws shall have overriding effect except in section 24(2) of the
Environment (Protection) Act 1986 which allows penalties under other Acts to operate
if the same offence falls under any other Act also. The output of the present provision
will be that the ecocrder will be subject to milder penalties under the mining laws as
compared to the maximum punishment under the present legislation.13
The above environmental laws do not specifically deal with mines but specific
provisions for mines can be found in the central government's notifications. The
mining and development activities had been badly affecting the environment of the
Doon Valley so the central government by a notification14 imposed restrictions on
starting any mining activities in this region without prior approval of the Union Ministry
of Environment and Forests.15 The notification put the mining industry extracting
ferrous and non-ferrous metals under the category of industries not to be permitted in
the Doon Valley.
The second notification16 required two types of clearances in case of mining
industries, (i) preliminary site clearance; and (ii) environmental clearance which would
be valid for five years. In this clearance process, first, the notification involved the
peoples' participation, and second, the environmental impact could be assessed by a
committee consisting of experts in the fields of air pollution and water pollution
control, flora and fauna survey and management, land management and
representation of NGOs and environmental action groups. The next notification of 1992
also put the mining activities in the specified area of the Aravalli Range also employing
the same as imposed under restrictions of the above notification of 29 January 1991.
(3) Judicial response
This takes us finally to the judicial approach with respect to the protection of
environment of the mining area In this part, we will confrne our examination to
Page: 437
the Doon Valley case only17 as it was the first case of its kind in the country involving
questions of great significance to the people of India. It was the case where the court
started its journey on 12 March 1985 and continued upto 30 April 1991—a six-year
long exercise.
On 2 July 1983 the representatives of the Kendra wrote to the Supreme Court about
the alleged illegal mining activities carried on by nearly 105 mine owners which was
causing a devastating effect on the environment of Mussoorie-Doon region. The court
treated this letter as a writ petition under article 32. The court by its First Order17
ordered for forthwith complete closure of mines having relatively more pronounced and
serious effect on the environment. In case of mines having less pronounced impact on
environment, the court divided them into two: those within and outside the city limits.
It was only in the case of the second category that the Supreme Court allowed such
mines to operate. It took the help of the reports of four expert committees appointed
by the court and the Union Government to balance environment and development.
The present Interim Order was handed down by Bhagwati, Sen and Misra J.T. who
tilted the balance on the side of environment as the Order points out:18
[I]t is a price that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the
people to live in healthy environment.
It may be noted that the court in this rigid wavelength did not lose sight of the
hardship of the lessees and mine workers. It directed the Union and Uttar Pradesh
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Governments to afford the displaced owner a priority in grant of lease in new mining
areas and the displaced workmen be employed in the eco-task force.
The court, in order to see that its Order reached to the desired goal, directed the
District Authorities of Dehradun to see that no mine was operated and no such activity
was carried on clandestinely. But the authorities did not do their job correctly and the
lessees continued with their mining activities clandestinely inspite of the court's order.
The unfortunate part was that neither the clandestine ecociders were subjected to any
punishment nor the inactive authorities were taught any lesson.
One more emerging dimension of the Order was that the advocate appearing on
behalf of some of the lessees was directed to get rupees five thousand from both the
Union and the UP. Government in recognition of the very valuable assistance rendered
by him to the court. Does not the assistance given by the advocate and experts point
towards a need for a separate information technology for the court? The surprising part
in the present case was that the court on its own allowed the letter to be treated as a
writ petition under article 32 of the Constitution of India; whereas, there was no claim
of any violation of fundamental right. This indicates that the court had assumed itselt
that the right to live in a clean environment had
Page: 438
come to stay in article 21.
Misra J.'s judgment in Doon Valley case19 is the next point for our examina tion.
One aspect which may be appreciated in this decision is that Misra J, speaking for
himself and Bhagwati C.J. put on record their appreciation for activising judicial
process and directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay the Kendra rupees ten thousand
as the cost within one month. This will encourage the NGOs and environmental action
groups to move the court to protect and improve the environment of India.
There are misgivings in the present judgment which include the court's inability to
balance the environment and development when Misra J. opines:20
[It] is for the Government and the Nation and not for the court, to decide
whether the deposits should be exploited at the cost of ecology and environmental
considerations or the industrial requirement should be otherwise satisfied.
The direction towards development also reflects in the scheme of balancing of
environment and development when Misra J. took the stand that the-balance could be
tilted in favour of environment if it affected in any serious way the environment.21
Is not the present stand against what was said in the First Order?22 The court's
other Orders show that it tried to balance environment and development. In view of
this fact, it is suggested that the court should be slow in abdicating its power of
judicial review as has been advocated in the judgment. Second, Misra J. traces the
history of environmental consciousness from the year 1972 when the United Nations
Conference on World Environment was held in Stockholm. Hut the reality has been
that the dharma of environment had deep roots in the ancient Indian society to which
the ancient literature bears testimony
In the Third Order23 the Supreme Court, consisting of Misra and Dutt JJ. started
diluting the rigid approach of 1985. The court, in the name of defence need and
burden on foreign exchange, took the stand that, mining activity has to be permitted
in the mines having less pronounced effect on environment. The Order says that such
permission shall depend on the balancing of need of defence and foreign exchange.on
the one and the environmental protection on the other. But the question remains: Will
the war or war like conditions allow the above balancing? It is a known fact that war
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dominates environment, and that is why war is one of the dreaded enemies of
environment.
The Supreme Court had allowed certain mines of lesser evil to operate but at the
same time a committee was appointed to monitor their working and in the subsequent
Doon Valley judgment24 the court decided about their fate. Misra J.
Page: 439
speaking for himself and Dutt J. allowed three mines to continue the mining activities
subject to certain conditions. It may be pointed out that Misra J. took as the basis for
the above conclusion, (i) the involvement of the public corporation and huge
investment; (ii) unemployment; and (iii) one year's life of the lessee. It is submitted
that these development related activities cannot be considered to be so pressing as to
tilt the balance on its side. Moreover these considerations will be present in other
ecociders and it will be discriminatory not to allow others.
The positive contribution of the present judgment is the court's concern to see that
its order/judgment reaches to the desired goals For this Misra J. appointed two
important committees headed by leading experts in India: namely, the rehabilitation
and monitoring committees. If these committees, it is submitted, work effectively and
sincerely, they would work as a watchdog of the court on the mining activities.
The drawback of the present innovative approach was that the supervisory role of
the judiciary with respect to implementation ot its order/direction was of a short
duration because Misra J pointed out:25 ”
It is not our intention to continue control over these matters, once this court is
satisfied that the Committee (src) are operating on the right lines we shall consider
whether it is any longer necessary for the court to supervise their activity (sic).
It is submitted that the after judgment caring approach of the judiciary has to be
continued with the continuance of the polluting activities, otherwise the clandestine
miners would silently and secretly eat away the existing natural environment.
In the Fourth Order, the Supreme Court modified its previous order and the
permission of subjective operation to one of the mines was converted into no
permission to operate. The polluter had given an undertaking to the court that they
would operate only in 15 acres out of the 100 acres of land; and, further, they would
take all preventive and protective measures for the protection of environment. But the
court, consisting of Misra and Venkatachaliah J.T. remained unmoved with the above
cries of the eco-molestor.
The other appreciable finding was that the court had exposed the luke-warm
attitude of the government and environmental authorities who, inspite of being
nominated as members of the monitoring committee, did not care to attend the
meeting and deputed their subordinates to participate in the meeting The court
directed the chairman of the committee that they may be dropped and two local
people from Dehradun and Mussoorie be co-opted in their place. It may be pointed out
that the governmental officials are under constitutional obligation and fundamental
duty to protect and improve the environment and they cannot and should not be
allowed to take such matters so casually.
Coming to the Fifth Order26 the court, consisting of Misra C.J. and Sawant J. came
down with iron hands on the clandestine lessee who, under the permission
Page: 440
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
of removing the leftout minerals, had indulged in fresh mining activities. The* lessee
was subjected to a penalty of Rs. 5 per MT of the freshly extracted materials! which
amounted to rupees three lakhs. This amount, the court ordered to be paid within two
months and to the fund of the monitoring committee. The present case is an eye
opener about the mischievous behaviour of the capitalist who forgot his fundamental
duty to protect the environment in his greedy vision to make maximum profit out of
the mining venture.
Apart from the Doon Valley case, a brief survey of other cases reveals that the
Supreme Court of India in other cases has not followed any consistent approach. In
Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India,27 the order of the Bench consisting of Sen and
Vcnkatachaliah JJ. allowed environment to be protected even at the cost of
development. A similar approach was also adopted by the Bench28 of Venkatachaliah
and Sahai JJ. in case of protection of the three hills—Ramshila, Prathilla and
Brahmyoni. On the contrary the Bench29 consisting of Bhagwati C.J. and Misra J.
moved towards the development side as it would, according to the court, compensate
a tremendous setback in industrial activity for want of energy. The outcome will be
that the greenary of Vindhya Valley would be affected and the habitats of tribals and
adhivasis30 would be disturbed by the establishment of the thermal power station.
IV Conclusion
This brings us to the final question. What has been the Indian law scenaric with
respect to mine and its environment? It is an undeniable fact that the mining
processes have molested the environment in and outside the mines leaving the living
beings, flora, fauna and what not in great misery and stresses a fact which remains
unattended seriously by the government environmental protection agencies. The net
result is that the lessees are enjoining the freedom to degrade the environment
silently and secretively.
The history of mining law from the British Raj to the first two decades of Swaraj
shows that the lust for the maximum mineral extraction resulted in the minimum
health care of the mine workers and least concern for the protection ol environment. It
was only at the platinum jubilee of the law of mines that the environmental
consciousness in Parliament and the Government of India started emerging. The last
one decade exercises showed merits and misgivings. The bright side included, on the
one hand, the care for flora and laud, and on the other neo-environmental law control
techniques: environmental auditing, clearance ane impact assessment. On the other
side were, (i) leftouts of other components o: environment; (ii) compensatory
measures with no time schedule; and (iii) new. innovations yet to be activised
vigorously. Penalties remained unpenalised. The mine was under many masters and
the diffused responsibilities were good for the
Page: 441
ecociders to evade the orders; and last but not the least, the right to environment and
environmental education and information could hardly be nurtured in this area.
The need of the hour is, firstly, to have a comprehensive specific mines
environmental legislation instead of having one medicine dose for all the problems.
Secondly, the law must not remain a police action tool but perform the role as the
guardian of environment. And lastly, the government agencies be made accountable
so that they leave inactivism and fulfil the constitutional pledge “to protect and
improve the environment.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Indian judiciary, in its journey from Ratlam (1980) to Mehta (1992), it has
been said, has performed its part, “well, boldly and with innovative zeal”31 . In the
present case law the judiciary started with great zeal to protect the leftout of the
green hills but at the close of the legal battle the court deviated a little from the rigid
approach. But it must be appreciated that inspite of the complex technological
problem and issues, the judiciary did not retreat from the battlefield, rather it decided
the dispute boldly against the enco-mafia. The court did not stick to the old procedural
niceties, rather it evolved innovative techniques and concept to suit the end of
environmental justice which if expanded consistently, would go a long way towards
compensating and regaining the lost environment. The court had a soft heart for the
displaced person but iron hands for those who brutally assaulted the green valleys.
One of the noteworthy contributions was that the judiciary did not close its eyes after
handing down the order but remained responsive for its proper execution, an after
caring judicial approach.
The court's journey in the mines' environment has left some misgivings as well. The
judges at times rang the constitutional obligation in different tunes, bringing the
ecociders the ‘fear not’ approach. One of the tragedies of the mines' environmental
justice was that the court did not handle boldly the inactive and misactive government
environmental protection agencies. Further, the court's rigid environmental vision was
at the time blurred by the defence and foreign exchange interests. There was delay in
the administration of environmental justice, an inimical approch to the environment.
And last but not the least, the court depended on outside technocrats for informations
rather than evolving its own impartial infrastructure for the information resources
through computer system with each individual justices. The above points have one
direction: A separate forum to administer environmental justice.
So what do we need now? All the organs of the state must share equally the
constitutional responsibility to protect and improve the environment. The time has
come when the mine owners must shun the feudalistic approach and go for
trusteeship concept in the socialist Democratic Republic of India. The success of the
overall integrated approach depends upon the most important postulate of
environment, environmental literacy for which the fundamental right to environmental
education and information must be nourished.
———
*LLM PhD (Lond.). Prolessor of Law, Banaras Hindu Unersity Varanasi, Member. Enviromental Law Commission.
Swizerland and International Fnvironmental Law Council, Germany.
1
K.S. Validiya. “Environment Impact of Mining”. in Mining and Environment in India 29-51 (1988).
2 See, for example. India - A Reference Annual. 551-6 (1994)
3 LIC v. Manubhar D. Shah., (1992) 3 SCC 637 : A.I.R. 1993 S.C. 171 : W.B. Power Developement Corpn. Ltd. v.
Union of India., 1989 SCC OnLine Cal 246 : AIR 1990 Cal 125. See for a detailed discussion CM. Jariwala. “The
Right to Environmental Education and Information: the Emerging Indian Environmental Law Vision”, a paper
presented at the Bareilly Conlerence on Human Rights. 1994.
4
Jaitli Gupta, el al, ““Sandstone Mines Eating into then Iungs” in The Hindu—Survew of the Envnonment 81
(1993). See also. G.I. Tandon. “Scent of Envnonmental Status in Coal Mining in India” in B.B. Dhar (edn).
Imaommental Management of Mining Operation 17 (1990)
5 See. Bamejai, el al. “Trace Element Burden and Human Health and Well Being” in B.B. Dhar (edn.). Ibid. at 54.
Jaitli, et al. id. al 81. Maheshwari Prasad. “Chotanagpur” in Abstiact: International Seminar on Environment,
Sustainable Development and Human Health. Varanasr 1995.
6 See tor example, Funes of India, 17-1-1994. 26-9-1994 and 19-11-1994. Saxena and Sen, Displacement and
Rehabilitation of Tubal and Scheduled Caste Population in Sonbhadra Distt. N.P. (1993):V Dhagamwar.
“Rehabilitation policy and Institutional changes required” in Fernandes and Thukral (ed). Development
Displacement and Rehabilitation (1987).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7
See, Ramnathan and Mehta. Report on Gurdelmes for Integaiting Envnonmental Concerns with Exploitation of
Mineral Resources (1988)
8 See for detailed discussion, C.M. Jariwala. “The Constitution 42nd Amendment Act and the Environment” in
S.L. Agrawal (edn.), Legal Control of Environmental Pollution 1 (1981).
9 L.K. Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan, 1986 SCC OnLine Raj 43 : A.I.R. 1988 Raj. 2. See also. CM. Jariwala.
“Emerging Right to Environment: An Indian Perspective” in International Conference on Shaping the Future by
Law: Children, Environment and Human Health, New Delhi, Souvenir 69 (1994)
10
See the detailed treatment in CM. Janwala. ibid.
11 Pathament is enacting laws relating to environment under Arts. 252. 253 rather than in Art. 248.
12Fora declared, study on Indian environment law see C M Jariwala. “Changing Dimension ol Indian Envnonmental
Law”, in Leela Krishnan (edn.) Law and Emnonment (1992)
13
Under mining laws the maximum penalties are imprisonment of two years and/or fine of Rs. 5000 whereas the
Fnvironment (Protection) Act 1986 imposes maximum penalties of seven years impusonment and tine ot Rs. one
lakh and Rs. 5000 per day lot every day's further continuation of the said offence.
14 Gazelle of India, no 465, 28-7-1989.
15See. for simlar provision for prior approval to use the reseived forest for non-forest purpose in the Forest
(Conservation) Act 1980. S. 2.
16
Gazette of India. Extraordinary, pt II, 29-2-1991. sub-S. 3(ii)
17Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v Stale of U.P. (1985) 2 SCC 431 : A.I.R. 1985 S.C. 652 (frist Order)
(hereinafter referred to as Doon Vallev case). There were in all five orders and two judgments. Second Order-,
(1985) 3 SCC 614 : AIR 1985 SC 1259 : Misra's judgment (I) - 1986 Supp SCC 517 : AIR 1987 SC 359 : Thud
Order - 1987 Supp SCC 487 : A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 2426. Misra's judgment (II)-1989 Supp (1) SCC 504 : A.I.R. 1988
S.C. 2187: Fourth Order - 1989 Supp (1) SCC 537 : A.I.R. 1989 S.C. 594 and Fifth Order - (1991) 3 SCC 347 :
A.I.R. 1991 S.C. 2216.
18 Ibid. at 656.
19
1986 Supp SCC 517 : A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 359.
20 Ibid. at 363.
21 Ibid. at 368.
(Emphasis added).
22 Supra note 17 at 656.
23
The Doon Valley case, Ibid. at 17.
24 Misia judgment, supra note 17.
25 Rural Litigation and Entillement Kendra v. State of U.P., AIR 1989 SC 594
26 AIR 1991 SC 2216.
27 1992 Supp (2) SCC 448 : A.I.R. 1992 S.C. 514.
28 Surendra Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 628 : A.I.R. 1991 S.C. 1042
29
Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of U.P., (1986) 4 SCC 753 : A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 374 at 376.
30See, U.P.SCs and STs Welfare Assoc v. State of U.P.. 1991 Supp (2) SCC 257 : A.I.R. 1991 S.C. 255. a case
where Venkatachaliah and Kasliwal JJ.'s Bench missed a micro-approach in (he protection of Ihe habitat oi
Taungya settlers in the Shivalik range of Uttar Pradesh.
31See, CM. Janwala. “Environment A Justice: Journey from Ratlam to Mehta”, a paper presented at the National
Seminar on Environmental Law, Policy and Perspectives. March, 1994, Madras. (Proceedings to be published
shortly).
Disclaimer: While every effort is made to avoid any mistake or omission, this casenote/ headnote/ judgment/ act/ rule/ regulation/ circular/
notification is being circulated on the condition and understanding that the publisher would not be liable in any manner by reason of any mistake
or omission or for any action taken or omitted to be taken or advice rendered or accepted on the basis of this casenote/ headnote/ judgment/ act/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rule/ regulation/ circular/ notification. All disputes will be subject exclusively to jurisdiction of courts, tribunals and forums at Lucknow only. The
authenticity of this text must be verified from the original source.

Mining Law and Environment Law 1995

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mining Law and Environment Law 1995

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCC Online Web Edition, © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd.

Page 1 Thursday, September 22, 2022

37 JILI (1995) 431

Mining and Environment: Indian Law Scenario

MINING AND ENVIRONMENT: INDIAN LAW SCENARIO

II Ill effects of mining activities

alia, the baseline information of prevailing environmental conditions before the

come to stay in article 21.

You might also like