M.C. MEHTA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 796 · Decided: 10-05-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH, FAIZAN UDDIN · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
M.C. MEHTA 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
MAY 10, 1996 
B 
[KULDIP SINGH AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.] 
Environmental Law: 
Pollution control and preservation of environment-Tourist resorts of 
C Badkal Lake and Surajkund in State of Haryanrr-Enviro111nent effected by 
air and noise pollution caused by stone cursher, pulven·sers and n1ining 
operations in the sun-ounding area-Writ petition filed seeking a direction to 
the H111yana Pollution Control Board to control the pollution-Supreme 
Court obtaining reports from Haiyana Pollution Control Board and the 
National Environmental Enginee1ing Research Institute-Held, in order to 
D preserve environment and control pollution within the vicinity of two tourist 
reso1ts, it would be reasonable to direct the stoppage of mining activity within 
two km. radius of the tourists of Badkal Lake and Surajkund. Directions given 
to maintain ecological balance and to create and maintain green belts as 
recommended by the NEERI-Renewal of mining leases within the area of 2 
E km. to 5 km. radius restricted. 
F 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION 
Interlocutory Application 
No. 22. 
IN 
Writ Petition (C) No. 4077 of 1985. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) 
Petitioner-in-person and Ms. Seema Mirdha, Arnn Jaitly, Swaraj 
G Kaushal, H.N. Salve, Anil B. Diwan, Gopal Subramanian, N.N. Goswami, 
S.B. Sanyal, Ms. Shirla Sethi, D.N. Goburdhan, Ms. Geeta Luthra, 
Saharaya & Co., R.K. Maheshwari, R.S. Suri, Ms. Hamantika Wahi, S. 
Sulmmaran, R. Khranjwala, Ravindra Narain, Sumeet Kachwaha, Punit 
Singh, Bimal Ray, Ramji Srinivasan, J.B. Dadachandji, T.C. Shanna, Sush-
H ma Suri, Ranjan Mukherjee, Ramesh Babu, M.R. for the appearing parties. 
796 
M.C. MEHTA v. U.0.1. 
797 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Mr. M.C. Mehta - environmentalist lawyer - has filed this public 
interest petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking a 
direction to the Haryana Pollution Control Board (the Board) to control 
the pollution caused by the stone curshers, pulverisers and mine operators 
in the Faridabad - Balabagarh area. We are in the process of monitoring 
the petition. The core question which we propose to deal with in this order 
is whether - to preserve environment and control pollution - the mining 
operations should be stopped within the radius of five kilometers (km) 
from the tourist resorts of Badkal Lake and Surajkund in the State of 
Haryana. 
This Court by the order dated November 20, 1995 directed the Board 
to inspect and ascertain the impact of mining operations on the ecologically 
sensitive area of Badkal lake and Surajkund. The inspection was done by 
A 
B 
c 
a team of the Board comprising of Dr. B. Sengupta, Senior Scientist, Shri D 
Lalit Kapoor, Senior Environmental Engineer, Shri R.C. Kataria, Environ-
mental Engineer and Dr. J. Moitra, Scientist 'B'. The inspection report of 
the Board was placed before this Court along with an affidavit filed by Dr. 
S.P. Chakrabarti, Member Secretary of the Board. In the affidavit, regard-
ing the mining activities, it is stated as under : 
11For the purpose of mining, explosives are being used for rock 
blasting. Because of unscientific mining operation, overburden 
materials (top soil and murum remain) were observed to be lying 
haphazardly. Deep mining for extracting silica sand lumps is caus-
E 
ing ecological disaster as these mines lie unreclaimed and aban-
F 
doned. As a matter of fact mining site reveals total lack of 
environmental planning!!. 
The report contains the following recommendations regarding the mining 
activities in the area: 
Mining: 
At present manual as \Vell as sen1i mechanised mining of hard 
stone, weathered soft stone and coarse sand in 33 mining area 
leased by the State Government of Haryana is operative. Ex-
G 
plosives are used for rock blasting. 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
798 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
Reco1nn1endations 
(1) Environmental Management Plan (EMP) shall be prepared by 
mine lease holders for their mines and actual mining operation 
made operative after obtaining approval from the State Depart-
ment of Environmental or Haryana State Pollution Control Board. 
The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Should be imple-
mented following a time-bound action plan. Land reclamation and 
afforestation programmes shall also be included in the EMP and 
must be implemented strictly by the implementing authorities. 
(2) Mining activities should be stopped \v
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.