LexK. GURUPRASAD RAO versus STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2013] 11 S.C.R. 581 K. GURUPRASAD RAO v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal No. 4823 of 2013) JULY 01, 2013 [G.S. SINGHVI AND RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.] A B Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 19581 Karnataka Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1961 C - Rules framed under - Mining operations - In the protected area around 'Protected Monuments' declared under the Central and the State Acts - Permissibility - Extent of - Writ petition in public interest praying for cancellation of mining lease and stopping of mining operations within a radius of one D kilometer from Jambunatha Temple which was declared as a protected monument under State Act - Objection to the petition on the ground that the mining operation was in terms of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Rules framed thereunder - Petition E dismissed by High Court - Appeal to Supreme Court - Constitution of Expert Committee by the Court - The Committee gave a finding that the mining activities using blasting operations at a distance of less than 200 meters from the temple has already caused irreparable damage to the F temple - The Committee made suggestions that the area surrounding the temple should be divided into two zones, i.e., Core Zone and Buffer Zone and there shall be total ban on mining within the Core Zone while mining be permitted in the Buffer Zone under the supervision of an expert body/agency - Held: Mining operations in the vicinity of protected ancient G and historical monuments and archaeological sites are regulated by 1958 Act (Central Act) or the State Act. (1961 Act) and Rules made thereunder, and not by 1957 Act or the rules 581 H 582 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2013) 11 S.C.R. A made thereunder - In the present case mining operations were without permission under 1958 and ~961 Acts and the Rules framed thereunder - Hence cannot be allowed to operate mines in the protected/regulated area - Recommendation of Expert Committee accepted and State B Government directed to implement the recommendations - Direction to Expert Committee to undertake similar exercise, as in the present case, in respect of other protected monuments in the State, having mining operations in their vicinity and submit its report to State Government - Central c Government also directed to appoint an Expert Committee to examine impact of mining on protected monuments under 1958 Act- Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959 - r. 10 - Karnataka Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and 0 Remains Rules, 1966 - rr. 11 to 15 - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - Mineral Concession Rules, 1961 - Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, 1988 - Constitution of India - Directive Principles - Art. 49. E Protection of Ancient Monuments - Mining activities around protected ancient monuments - Ban on - Effect of - On right to development - Held: Right to developmental includes whole spectrum of civil, cultural, economic, political and social process for the improvement of people's well being F and realization of their full potential - In view of the principle of sustainable development, the protection of ancient monuments has necessarily to be kept in mind, while carrying out development activities - Principle of sustainable G H development. Public Interest Litigation - Power of Supreme Court - To issue directions, which may appear to be contrary to the statutes - Scope of. Res Judicata - Applicability of - Held: In absence of K. GURUPRASAD RAO v. STATE OF KARNATAKA 583 record of the previous proceedings, principle of res judicata A cannot be applied in the present case. Jambunatha Temple, which was built in the year 1540 on Jambunath Hill in the State of Kerala, was declared as a 'Protected Monument' by the Government of- Karnataka 8 u/s. 4 of Karnataka Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1961. By a Notification dated 13.9.1991 an area of 9 acres 12 cents on all four sides of the Temple was declared as a 'Protected Area'. By another Notification dated 7 .12.1996, C the State Government declared an area within the radius of 200 meters from the periphery and precincts of the Temple a 'Safe Zone' where no mining activity could be conducted. The Director of Ancient Monuments after insp
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.