LexUNION TERRITORY OF J & K (PREVIOUSLY STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR) & ANR. versus RAJA MUZAFFAR BHAT & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 2056 : 2025 INSC 1025 Union Territory of J & K (Previously State of Jammu & Kashmir) & Anr. v. Raja Muzaffar Bhat & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 8055 of 2022) 22 August 2025 [Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Accepting the recommendations of the EAC, the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) granted Environmental Clearance (EC) to the project proponent on 19.04.2022. Aggrieved by the issuance of EC dated 19.04.2022, person interested in environment, respondent no.1 filed an appeal before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which was allowed. Whether the decision of NGT requires any interference. Headnotes† Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines, 2016 – Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020 – Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 – Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2016 – The National Highway Authority of India awarded a contract to the project proponent for construction of a 4-lane bypass/ring road around Srinagar City – Four mineral blocks were reserved for the project proponent to excavate, develop and utilise the mineral – The project proponent applied for environment clearances (EC) for extraction of sand and gravel in the 3 blocks – J&K Expert Appraisal Committee (J&K EIAA) by its order dated 02.03.2022 granted the environmental clearance, however, it specifically recorded that the District Survey Report is not formulated as per guidelines and therefore it needs revision for including the replenishment data – Following, SEIAA granted EC to the project proponent on 19.04.2022 – Aggrieved by issuance of EC, respondnet no.1 filed appeal before the NGT – NGT allowed the appeal and held that the EC was granted despite the DSR not being prepared in line with the guidelines – Challenge to: [2025] 8 S.C.R. 2057 Union Territory of J & K (Previously State of Jammu & Kashmir) & Anr. v. Raja Muzaffar Bhat & Ors. Held: The purpose and objective of preparing such District Survey Report (DSR) is to scientifically locate the place for sand mining after calculation of annual rate of replenishment for allowing mining in the area – The replenishment report is an integral part of the DSR – In light of Guidelines, 2016 and the Guidelines, 2020, the absence of a replenishment study renders a DSR fundamentally defective – These guidelines categorically require that any assessment of mineable mineral quantity must be premised on scientific estimation of replenishment rates, failing which the DSR lacks the foundational data necessary to determine sustainable extraction limits – If the DSR becomes the foundation for consideration of an application for environmental clearance, then it is compelling to ensure replenishment studies are undertaken in advance and the report forms an integral part of the DSR – A District Survey Report without a proper replenishment study is untenable – On facts, J&K EIAA compromised with regulatory integrity by granting the environment clearances (EC) on the basis of a DSR without a replenishment report – The compromise sought to be achieved by permitting the project proponent to go ahead with a “restricted mining depth of maximum 1 meter and bulk density of 2.0 for production of the mineral and supplying it to maximum production of 34800 mt in view of non-availability of replenishment data” is unacceptable – Thus, the decision of the NGT is upheld. [Paras 1, 29, 32, 33, 37, 39] Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines, 2016 – Guiding principle: Held: The 2016 guidelines are based on the principle that unregulated sand mining is unsustainable and must be controlled – Compliance with existing and future laws is mandatory rather than optional – Leaseholders should be allowed to self-regulate, provided they demonstrate adherence to legal requirements – However, if self-regulation proves ineffective, stricter enforcement and monitoring will be necessary, with penalties imposed in accordance with the law – Additionally, environmental protection and public well-being must be prioritized, ensuring that natural resources are utilized responsibly to contribute positively and sustainably to the economy – The prime objective of the said Guidelines is to ensure that sand mining is done in an environmentally sustainable and socially responsible manner. [Para 24] 2058 [2025] 8 S.C.R. Supreme
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.