| CITATION | AIR 2012 SC 2326; 2012 (7) SCC 407 |
| DATE OF JUDGEMENT | 26th August 2022 |
| COURT | Supreme Court of India |
| APPELLANT | Samaj Parivartana Samudaya and ors. |
| RESPONDENT | State of Karnataka and ors. |
| BENCH | C.T. Ravikumar, Hima Kohli, N.V. Ramana, JJ |
INTRODUCTION
The case of Samaj Parivartana Samudaya vs. State of Karnataka is a landmark case regarding the issue of illegal mining activities being performed in the Bellary district of the state of Karnataka, India. The case is of significant importance since it brought to light the problem of loss of revenue to the state and the additional issues of environmental degradation and its adverse impact on the lives of the local communities staying there. The petitioners, Samaj Parivartana Samudaya, a non-governmental organization, along with others approached the Supreme Court of India, seeking the court’s intervention to stop illegal mining activities in the Bellary district, followed by the districts of Tumkur and Chitradurga. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution complaining of little or no coercive action on the part of the State to bring a stop to such activities. The court appointed the Oversight Authority to take inputs from stakeholders, including the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and Monitoring Committee, and to send their opinion to the Court within a period of four weeks.
FACTS OF THE CASE
- Samaj Parivartan Samudaya (SPS) is a Voluntary Organization working in different parts of India. It works in close cooperation with several other voluntary organizations, networks, and movements, to promote actions with people’s power of participation on a broader scale towards social transformation and to bring about larger collective impacts on the governmental policies, deliberated legislations, and programs for human well-being.
- The Samaj Parivartan Samudaya filed allegations of systematic plunder of natural resources in the State of Karnataka by a handful of opportunists who carried out the act of indiscriminate mining of ore and other allied materials solely for immediate gains.
- Various committees and organizations, including the Justice U.L Bhat Committee and the Lokayukta of the State, had investigated the issue and reported on the illegal mining activities held in Bellary district.
- The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) , so appointed, submitted a report that revealed the monopoly of such individuals and their corrupt activities which lead to significant environmental degradation.
- Besides, several recommendations were made by CEC to check on the activities, including fixing boundaries of the mining leases, imposing penalties on violations, suspending operations in certain leases, prohibiting the sale or export of iron ores and allied materials from certain mines, etc.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether the court had the jurisdiction to deal with allegations of systematic plunder of natural resources?
- Whether there was compliance with the statutory provisions and environmental regulations in the mining operations?
- Whether there was validity of the recommendations made by CEC?
- Whether the categorization of mining leases based on encroachment and such classification reasonable?
CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT
- The appellant submitted this petition in view of public interest to maintain the institutional integrity of the public institution meant for the prevention and eradication of corruption in the State of Karnataka.
- Mr. Prashant Bhushan brought into view the report of the learned Lokayukta, which suggested that the rate of mining of iron ore in the State of Karnataka was unsustainable and would result in the exhaustion of the iron ore deposits in the State of Karnataka within 30 years that would seriously adversely impact the goal of inter-generational equity.
- The petitioner also submitted that the learned Oversight Authority has sought additional information regarding the infrastructural capacity before giving an opinion as to the viability of lifting the ceiling limit, this Court should presently refrain from passing any orders at this juncture.
CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENT
- Mr. Dushyant Dave, the counsel for the respondent, submitted that the present regime relating to iron ore mining in the State of Karnataka, where the Court imposed ceiling limits, has been in existence for over a decade.
- When the ceiling limit was first imposed, the Court was confronted with a vastly different situation, where there was rampant illegal mining activity taking place in the State of Karnataka. But the said situation has now been remedied through a series of orders passed by this Court.
- As a result, all illegal mining in the area has been halted and several ameliorative measures have been taken for the improvement of the environment and ecology of the region.
- The respondent also submitted that the present mining lease holders, who are complying with all the laws, are being unfairly penalized for the illegalities that were committed a decade ago. Such ceiling limits have resulted in a discriminatory situation where mining lease holders in the State of Karnataka are governed by one legal regime, while those in other States of the country are governed by a completely different regime.
JUDGEMENT
The Supreme Court of India undoubtedly has the jurisdiction under Article 32 to enforce fundamental rights and take necessary actions to remedy environmental degradation of any kind. The Supreme Court took cognizance of the matter and directed the central and state governments to take necessary action to prevent illegal mining activities.
While considering the report of the Oversight Authority and the recommendations made by the CEC, the Court deemed it necessary to carry out certain categories of activities in compliance with environmental protection and the law of the country. The Court has the authority under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for complete justice and protection of natural resources. Also, the categorization of the mining leases was deemed reasonable and in line with the objectives of environmental protection. The Court directs expedited implementation of its orders and disposal of related applications. The Supreme Court ordered the suspension of mining activities in the Bellary district and directed the mining companies to pay compensation for the damages caused to the environment and the affected communities.
ANALYSIS
In today’s world, environmental problems pose a very serious threat to plant, animal, and human life as a whole. While focusing on increasing our capital income, we often tend to forget the importance of the environment we are living in. Natural resources are present in a very limited quantity and ever-increasing exploitation of our valuable natural resources will bring doom to us. So, the court’s intervention on the matter of illegal mining was very reasonable, and restricting such activities majorly essential to maintain the ecological balance which tends to be destroyed by profit-driven individuals. Also, the government imposed restrictions on such harmful activities to curb those individuals from exploiting the precious natural resources any further. However, this is not a problem that is only prevalent in Karnataka, and many more organizations and individuals just like the petitioner, Samaj Parivartana Samudaya need to come up and address the serious issues so that we can live a life exploitation-free.
CONCLUSION
The case highlighted the need for effective regulation of the mining sector and the importance of holding mining companies accountable for any violations which ultimately brought a series of reforms in the mining sector. It brought attention to the need for effective regulation of the mining sector, the protection of the environment, and the rights of local communities. The Karnataka government implemented the recommendations made by the Supreme Court-appointed committee to bring a closure of illegal mines and activities relating to such illegal mining sites. Besides, the government also introduced a new mining policy to regulate mining activities in the state.
The Samaj Parivartana Samudaya case demonstrates the importance of protecting the environment and the rights of local communities, especially in resource-rich regions where the exploitation of natural resources can have adverse consequences. Thus, the case was a remarkable event in the fight against illegal mining activities performed in India on a day-to-day basis. The court’s intervention in the case resulted in the closure of several illegal mines and the implementation of reforms in the mining sector, setting an example for other resource-rich regions in India and around the world. The case has set a precedent for future cases, demonstrating the importance of protecting the environment and the rights of local communities, and the necessary role of the judiciary in upholding these values.
REFERENCES
2.Samaj Parivartana Samudaya and Others v. State of Karnataka and Others – Supreme Court Cases
This article is written by Zeenat Tasnim, a student of the Department of Law, Calcutta University; an intern at Legal Vidhya.
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.
0 Comments