High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeDisposed of by directions (as per Goa Foundatio...

Prestige Rock Products Private Limited v. Director of Mining and Geology Directorate, Government of Kerala, and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • AMIT RAWAL
Judgment Date
2020-01-28
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition disposed of with directions in line with Goa Foundation judgments: (i) Open a file in petitioner's name with all relevant documents, including mining lease, and forward to MoEF within 15 days; (ii) MoEF to place files before Standing Committee within one week for decision within two months; (iii) Stop memos to remain in force only for the fixed period; (iv) If MoEF issues final notification under Environment Act, interdiction is vacated; (v) The petitioner may operate quarry as per EC and mining lease; (vi) Processing Ext.P6 does not amount to granting mining license until complete proceedings.
Final Disposition
Disposed of by directions (as per Goa Foundation framework)

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • M/S. Prestige Rock Products Private Limited Pazhayanur P.O., Thrissur District 680 587, Rep by its Director, Shri Muneer Nalakath

Respondents

  • The Director of Mining and Geology, Directorate of Mining and Geology, Kesavadasapuram, Pattam Palace PO, Thiruvananthapuram 695 004
  • Addl R2, Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, Indira Paryavaran Bhavan, Jor Bagh Road, New Delhi-110003
  • Addl R3, State of Kerala, represented by its Secretary, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001
  • Addl R4, The National Board of Wildlife, represented by its Director (Wild Life Wing), Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Indira Paryavaran Bhavan, Jor Bagh Road, New Delhi-110 003
  • Addl R5, The State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) Kerala, represented by its Member Secretary, K.S.R.T.C, Bus Terminal Complex, 4th Floor, Thampanoor, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001
  • Addl R6, The Kerala State Pollution Control Board, represented by its Environmental Engineer, Kerala State Pollution Control Board Building No 27/166/13, Kovilakathumpadam, Chembuk kavvu, Thrissur, 680020

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri.K.ANAND
  • • Sri.BENNY ANTONY PAREL
  • • Sri.T.M.MUHAMED HAFEES

Counsels for Respondents

  • • R1 Government Pleader
  • • R2 SMT.PREMLATHA K. NAIR, CGC
  • • R5 ADV. SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN
  • • R6 SRI. T.NAVEEN SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, Prestige Rock Products Private Limited, seeks directions to process Ext.P6 for grant of a quarrying lease and to ensure the environmental clearance process under the law. The High Court, noting that the matter falls within parameters laid down in Goa Foundation v. Union of India (2011) and Goa Foundation v. Union of India and others (2014), directs the Government to act promptly to align the project with environmental safeguards while respecting the petitioner’s claimed pre-2012 mining lease. The court instructs the Government to open a file in the petitioner’s name containing all relevant documents, including the mining lease, and to forward it to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF) along with the environmental change-recording within fifteen days from the date of the judgment. If any germane documents are missing, the Government may ask the petitioner to supply them to the Secretary, Environment Department, so there is no delay. After receipt, the MoEF must place the files before the Standing Committee within one week to enable a decision under the Supreme Court’s interim orders. The Standing Committee is to process the files and provide recommendations within two months from receipt. Stop memos issued by geologists will operate only for the fixed period; if a final MoEF notification regarding Eco-Sensitive Zones in Kerala is issued during that period, the interdiction will stand vacated. The order clarifies that processing Ext.P6 does not amount to a mining license, and the petitioner will be governed by the environmental clearance and mining lease where applicable.

Provisions of Law Cited

Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner asserts that he is in possession of a mining lease prior to 18.05.2012 and, therefore, not obligated to obtain an Environmental Clearance. He seeks directions to process Ext.P6 for quarrying lease and to forward EC papers to the MoEF within a specified time. He relies on the Supreme Court’s Goa Foundation decisions (2011 and 2014) and on interim orders, to argue for timely processing and to ensure there is no delay in forwarding documents, with liberty to supply missing materials to the Environment Department.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that environmental clearance processes must be followed under the Environment Act with the MoEF and Standing Committee given the authority to assess and decide; the government must forward the papers and ensure compliance with interim orders and the Supreme Court's directions. The emphasis is on adherence to statutory environmental safeguards and expeditious forwarding and processing of clearance papers under the existing regulatory framework.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Goa Foundation v. Union of India[(2011) 15 Supreme Court Cases 793]PositiveThe judgment explicitly adopts the Goa Foundation directions regarding environmental clearances.
Goa Foundation v. Union of India and others[(2014) 6 Supreme Court Cases 590]PositiveThe judgment cites and applies the later Goa Foundation decision for interim orders and processing framework.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Prestige Rock Products Private Limited v. Director of Mining and Geology Directorate, Government of Kerala, and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL** **TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 8TH MAGHA, 1941** ## **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **M/S. PRESTIGE ROCK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED PAZHAYANNUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 587, REP BY ITS DIRECTOR, SHRI MUNEER NALAKATH** **BY ADVS. SRI.K.ANAND SRI.BENNY ANTONY PAREL SRI.T.M.MUHAMED HAFEES** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTAM PALACE PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004** - **2 ADDL R2 , MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, INDIRA PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, JORBAGH ROAD, NEW DELHI-110003 ADDL R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 06-06-2019 IN IA NO.1/2019.** - **3 ADDL R3, STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** - **4 ADDL R4, THE NATIONAL BOARD OF WILD LIFE, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR (WILD LIFE WING) , MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, 3RD FLOOR, VAYU WING, INDIRA PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, JORBAGH ROAD, ALIGANJ, NEW DELHI-110 003.** - **5 ADDL R5, THE STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY(SEIAA) KERALA** - **REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, K.S.R.T.C, BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **2** **6** **ADDL R6, THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD BUILDING NO 27/166/13, KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR, 680020. ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18-06-2019 IN IA 2/2019 IN WP(C) 38207/2018.** **R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER R2 BY SMT.PREMLATHA K. NAIR, CGC R5 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN R6 BY SRI. T.NAVEEN SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **GP SRI KANNAN S** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **3** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner has approached this Court seeking directions to the respondent to process Ext.P6 application for grant of quarrying lease. The writ petition can be disposed in the light of the directions passed in W.P.(C) No.26431/2019 and other connected petitions (2020 (1) KLT 109). The directions contained therein were issued in terms of the interim orders as well as judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in **Goa Foundation v. Union of India** [(2011) 15 Supreme Court Cases 793] as well as **Goa Foundation v. Union of India and others** [(2014) 6 supreme Court cases 590] and the case of the petitioner is also falling within the aforementioned parameters. Accordingly, I dispose of the writ petition with similar directions as contained in the judgment of this Court cited supra, which is as under:- “a) Since the petitioner asserts that he is in possession of a mining lease prior to 18.05.2012 and therefore, not being obligated to obtain an Environmental clearance, the Government is directed to open a file in his name containing all other relevant documents, including the Mining Lease; and forward it to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **4** Change-recording therein that the petitioner has not obtained an Environmental Clearance for this reasonwithin fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If, for any reason, any other germane documents are found wanting, the Government will be at liberty to ask the petitioner to make available all such before the Secretary, Environment Department, so that there will be no delay in forwarding the same by the Government within the period granted above without seeking further extension of time. b) The Government of Kerala will forthwith and within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment forward the Environmental Clearances, along with all other necessary papers, to the MoEF. If, for any reason, the necessary papers are found wanting, the Government will be at liberty to seek such from the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), who will make the same available without any delay. I also leave liberty to the petitioner to make available his papers before the competent authority of the Government, which is stated to be the Secretary, Environment Department, for such purpose. I make it clear that the intent of this Court is that there shall be no delay in forwarding the papers and that the Government will be obligated to do so within the period granted herein, without seeking any further extension of time. c) On the files as ordered above reaching the **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **5** MoEF, they will be obligated to place it before the Standing Committee within a period of one week from the date on which it is received, so as to enable the said authority to take a decision in terms of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. d) The Standing Committee, on receiving the files as per the afore directions, will immediately process the files and make their recommendations, as per the interim order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goa Foundation ((2011) 15 SCC 793) and this shall be done not later than two months from the date on which they receive the files from the MoEF. e) The afore directions having been issued, I must also clarify that the stop memos issued by the Geologists will remain in force only during the period that I have fixed above and if there is any delay by any authority, be that the Government of Kerala or the MoEF or the Standing Committee, in complying with the afore directions, on the expiry of the cumulative period mentioned above, the said memos issued by the Geologists will become inoperative and the petitioner will, thereupon, be entitled to commence his activities as per the Environmental Clearances and the Mining Leases obtained by him. Needless to say, if, during the aforementioned period, the final notification is issued by the MoEF under the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 with respect to the Eco Sensitive Zones in Kerala, the **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **6** interdiction as ordered above will stand vacated from that date and the petitioner will be entitled to operate his quarries depending upon the said notification and as per the stipulations therein. f) By way of a further clarification, I order that the afore directions and the operation of the stop memos will be only with respect to the petitioner's quarrying activities and that the operation of the stone crusher units, if any, as long as they are done in compliance with all necessary imperative and statutory conditions and as long as the raw material for the same is from other sources and not from the quarries in question, will not be covered by him, thereby to mean that he can continue to operate them, notwithstanding the stop memos issued by the Geologists, subject to further orders to be issued by the Standing Committee.” In addition to the directions already issued by the Court, I direct the competent authority to process Ext.P6 application for quarrying lease preferred by the petitioner. But it do not tantamount to granting of the mining licence until the proceedings as aforesaid is completed or the period fixed as above expires. **Sd/-** sab ## **AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE** **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **7** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE ORDERS NO. B1-169000/2017/DEIAA/TSR DATED 29-05-2018 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OIF INTENT NO. 5549/M3/2017 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 30-08-2017** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWED EXPLOSIVE LICENSE NO. E/SC/KL/22/1453(E67694) DATED 14-032018** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT NO:PCB/DO/TSR/F/ICO/7988/2018 DATED 12-062018** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO:A4-395/18-19 DATED 27-06-2018 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 30-032017 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT NOTIFICATION NO. S O 3327(E) DATED 07-12-2015 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE A DRAFT NOTIFICATION SO 657(E) DATED 03-04-2016 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C) NO. 30042/2018 DATED 13-09-2018 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(P) NO. 25/2017 DATED 22-06-2017 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 25-09-2018** **WP(C).No.38207 OF 2018(A)** **8** ## **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R1 A A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.12.2006 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.460/2004.** **EXHIBIT R1 B A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 9.2.2011 ISSUED BY THE MOEF TOGETHER WITH GUIDELINES.** **EXHIBIT R1 C A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DATED 2.12.2009. EXHIBIT R1 D A TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINES DATED 15.3.2011 ISSUED BY THE MOEF.** **EXHIBIT R1 E A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 13.6.2018 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.40525/2017.** **EXHIBIT R1 F A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.6.2018 IN WRIT APPEAL NO.1201/2018.**