TARUN BHARAT SANGH, ALWAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [1993] 3 S.C.R. 21 · Decided: 08-04-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY

Judgment (excerpt)

. -
TARUN BHARAT SANGH, AL WAR 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
APRIL 8, 1993 
[B.P.JEEVAN REDDY AND N. VENKATACHALA,JJ.] 
B 
Constitution of lndia, 1950: Article 32. 
Forest (Conservation) Act 1980: Section 2. 
c 
Rajasthan Forest Act: Section 29. 
Rajastlian Miner Mineral Concession Rules, .J986: Rule 4(6). 
Environment (Protection) Act: 1986, Section 3 and Notification 0 
dated May 7, 1992. Environment-Protection of-Illegal mining activ-
ity in area declared as Tiger Reserve in A/war District of Rajastllan-
Diretions by Court. 
The petitioner, a voluntaQ' organisation interested in protecting 
environment, approached this Court under Article 32 of the Consti-
E 
tution of India com plaining of the widespread illegal mining activity 
going on in the area declared as a Tiger Reserve in Alwar District in 
the State of Rajasthan. It prayed that in the interest of ecology, 
environment and rule of law, the activity should stop. It was alleged 
that the area where the mining activity was carried on was declared F 
as a tiger reserve under the Rajasthan Wild Animals and Birds 
Protection Act, 1951; as a sanctuary and a National Park under the 
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and as protected forest under the 
Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, and that these notifications prohibit all or 
any mining activity, and yet the State Government had granted 
hundreds of licences for mining marble, dolomite and other materials G 
and that such section was contrary to law. 
This Court issued notices to the State Government and the 
mineowners respondents in the Writ Petition. An inter~ocutory direc-
tion wasalsomadethat no mining operation be carried on in the protected H 
21 
22 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1993) 3 S.C.R. 
A area. 
B 
The Court also appointed a Committee under the Chairmanship 
of a Former Judge of the State High Court to ensure due obsen·ance 
of the various Acts and Notifications that had been issued in respect 
of the protected area. The Committee was requested in particular to 
demarcate the area declared as protected forest under the notifica-
tion dated January 1, 1975 issued by the Rajasthan Government 
under Section 29 of the Rajasthan Forest Act. 
The Committee submitted its Report dated September 28, 1992, 
C stating that the Committee had verified and cross-checked the tracing 
maps furnished by the Forest Department with the maps furnished by 
..__ 
the Revenue Department and found that both of them matched, and 
that after looking into the Khasra numbers mentioned in the notifi-
cation dated January 1, 1975 and the other material placed before it 
•• 
D by the parties, the Committee identified the areas declared as pro-
tected forest. It stated that the_}' were not in one contiguous block. hut 
were comprised in several blocks or areas. The 215 mines mentioned 
in Appendix-A to the Report fall complete!_}' within the areas declared 
as protected forest while 47 mines mentioned in Appendix-B to the 
Report fall partly inside and partly outside the areas declared as 
E protected forest. There was no difference of opinion among the 
members of the committee regarding the location of the mines but 
only with respect to the question whether they should be directed to 
ht- dosed. The Chairman recommended that .the mining operations in 
all the 215 mines listed in Appendix-A should be stopped forthwith 
F 
and the mining operation in the 47 mines listed in Appendix-B be 
stopped forthwith to the extent they fell within the area declared as 
proteded forest. The three other Members of the Committee viz. 
Colledor, Chief Conservator of Forest and Chief Wildlife Warden 
and Additional Director of Mines differed from the Chairman. They 
suggested that this Court should accede to the representation of the 
G State Government (Appendix 'C') that th.e area ~overed by the mines 
should be allowed to be excluded from the protected forest, in lieu of 
which the state Government undertook to provide an equal extent of 
.. 
the area for being included in the protected forest. The Sate 
Government's application to the Court was also to the same effect. It 
r 
H was stated therein that the protected forest area measures about 800 
TAR UN BHARAT SANGH v. UNION OF INDIA 
23 
Sq. kilometers whereas the 262 mines mentioned in Appendixes'~' A 
and 'B' co\'er only an area of 2.08 Sq. kilometers and that in the 
interest of the economy of the State, industry and workers, an extent 
of 5.02 Sq. kilometers including the area covered by t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.