Order
1. This Court, by orders passed on 29-7-2011 (2011) 12 SCC 491 and 26-8-2011 (2013) 8 SCC 209, had imposed a ban on mining operations in all the mining leases (except two mining leases of M/s NMDC Ltd.) in the districts of Bellary, Tumkur and Chitradurga in the State of Karnataka. Later on, the ban was lifted and permission was given for resumption of mining operations in some of the Category ‘A’ mines, as enumerated in Annexure R-1 to the Central Empowered Committee's (CEC) Report dated 29-8-2012, subject to certain conditions, as stipulated in the order passed by the Court on 3-9-2012 (2013) 8 SCC 219.
2. We now propose to deal with the Category ‘B’ mines.
3. The CEC has put 65 mining leases in Category ‘B’, besides 7 mining leases in Category B-1 (vide Annexure R-10, pp. 112-14 of the CEC report dated 3-2-2012). The 7 mining leases in Category B-1 will be dealt with later on, separately. Further, there are two mining leases [one in respect of M/s S.B Minerals (ML No. 2515) and the other in favour of Shanthalakshmi Jayaram (ML No. 2553) at Serial Nos. 1 and 2 of Annexure R-10 of the aforementioned report] which the amicus suggests, for various reasons, should be dealt with along with the Category ‘C’ mines. The amicus' suggestion is accepted and the aforesaid two mining leases will also be dealt with later on while dealing with the Category ‘C’ mines. Resultantly, this order is in respect of the 63 Category ‘B’ mining leases enumerated at Serial Nos. 3 to 65 of Annexure R-10 of the CEC report dated 3-2-2012.
4. The amicus has submitted a note dated 27-9-2012, which actually gives a gist of the main features of the earlier CEC reports on the subject. In this note, the amicus suggests certain steps which are essential before the Court may consider granting permission for resumption of mining operations in the 63 Category ‘B’ mining leases. The suggestions of the amicus are contained in Paras 6 to 9 and Para 10 (which has a number of sub-paragraphs) of the note. The suggestions include, compensatory payments by the leaseholders for repairing the environmental depredation wrought by the leaseholders by unplanned, and to an extent, illegal mining done in their respective areas and the implementation of the reclamation and rehabilitation (R&R) plan by each of the leaseholders. Another important suggestion is in regard to the constitution of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) by the State of Karnataka to carry out the ambitious, but highly essential comprehensive environment plans for the mining impact zone (Cepmiz) in order to restore the environmental damage caused in the area by illegal and reckless mining on a very large scale and to ensure that the environment in the area may not suffer from any such abuse and destruction in future.
5. On hearing Mr Shyam Divan, the Amicus, Mr C.A Sundaram, Senior Counsel appearing for Karnataka Iron and Steel Manufacturers' Association, Mr C.U Singh, Senior Counsel appearing for the Association of Indian Mini Blast Furnaces, Mr Altaf Ahmed, Senior Counsel appearing for FIMI, Mr Krishnan Venugopal, Senior Counsel appearing for NSPL Ltd., Mr Prashant Bhushan, and on a careful consideration of the amicus' note and the earlier reports of CEC on the subject, we pass the following directions as the absolute first step before we consider any resumption of mining operations in the 63 Category ‘B’ mining leases:
5.1 Compensatory payment: (a) Each of the leaseholders must pay compensation for the areas under illegal mining pits outside the sanctioned area, as found by the Joint Team (and as finally held by CEC) at the rate of Rs 5 crores per hectare, and (b) for the areas under illegal overburden dumps, roads, offices, etc. outside the sanctioned lease area, as found by the Joint Team (as might have been finally held by CEC) at the rate of Rs 1 crore per hectare.
5.1.1 It is made clear that the payment at the rates aforesaid is the minimum payment and each leaseholder may be liable to pay additional amounts on the basis of the final determination of the national loss caused by the illegal mining and the illegal use of the land for overburden dumps, roads, offices, etc. Each leaseholder, besides making payment as directed above, must also give an undertaking to CEC for payment of the additional amounts, if held liable on the basis of the final determination.
5.1.2 At the same time, we direct for the constitution of a committee to determine the amount of compensatory payment to be made by each of the leaseholders having regard to the value of the ore illegally extracted from forest/non-forest land falling within or outside the sanctioned lease area and the profit made from such illegal extraction and the resultant damage caused to the environment and the ecology of the area.
5.1.3 The Committee shall consist of experts/officers nominated each by the Ministry of Mines and the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The convener of the Committee will be the Member-Secretary of CEC. The two members nominated by the Ministry of Mines and the Ministry of Environment and Forests along with the Member-Secretary, CEC shall co-opt two or three officers from the State Government. The Committee shall submit its report on the aforesaid issue through CEC to this Court within three months from today.
5.1.4 The final determination so made, on being approved by the Court, shall be payable by each of the leaseholders.
5.2 Guarantee money for implementation of the R&R plan in the respective sanctioned lease areas: CEC shall make an estimate of the expenses required for the full implementation of the R&R plan in each of the 63 Category ‘B’ mines and each of the leaseholders must pay the estimated amount as guarantee for implementation of the R&R plans in their respective sanctioned lease areas and in the areas where they carried on illegal mining activities or which were used for illegal overburden dumps, roads, offices, etc. beyond the sanctioned lease area. In case, any leaseholder defaults in implementation of the R&R plan, it will be open to CEC to carry out the R&R plan for that leasehold through some other proper agency from the guarantee money deposited by the leaseholder. However, on the full implementation of the R&R plan to the complete satisfaction of CEC and subject to the approval by the Court, the guarantee money would be refundable to the leaseholder.
5.3 In addition to the above, each leaseholder must pay a sum equivalent to 15% of the sale proceeds of its iron ore sold through the Monitoring Committee as per the earlier orders of this Court. In this regard, it may be stated that though the amicus suggests the payment @ 10% of the sale proceeds, having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we have enhanced this payment to 15% of the sale proceeds.
5.3.1 Here it needs to be clarified that CEC/Monitoring Committee is holding the sale proceeds of the iron ores of the leaseholders, including the 63 leasehold being the subject of this order. In case, the money held by CEC/Monitoring Committee on the account of any leaseholder is sufficient to cover the payments under the aforesaid three heads, the leaseholder may, in writing, authorise CEC to deduct from the sale proceeds on its account the amounts under the aforesaid three heads and an undertaking to make payment of any additional amount as compensatory payment. On submission of such authorisation and undertaking, CEC shall retain the amounts covering the aforesaid three heads and pay to the leaseholder concerned the balance amount, if any. It is expected that the balance amount, after making the adjustments as indicated here, would be paid to the leaseholder concerned within one month from the date of submission of the authorisation and the undertaking.
5.3.2 In the case of any leaseholder, if the money held on his account is not sufficient to cover the aforesaid three heads, he must pay the deficit within two months from today.
5.4 The R&R plans for the aforesaid 63 Category ‘B’ mines may be prepared as early as possible, as directed by orders of this Court dated 13-4-2012 (2013) 8 SCC 213, 20-4-2012 (2013) 8 SCC 216 and 4-5-2012 (2013) 8 SCC 217, and in case where the R&R plan is already prepared and ready, the leaseholder may take steps for is comprehensive implementation, both within and outside the sanctioned lease area, without any delay.
Survey in District Anantpur, Andhra Pradesh
6. The Joint Team constituted by the orders of this Court dated 6-5-2011 (2011) 12 SCC 493 and 26-8-2011 (2013) 8 SCC 209 is directed to prepare survey sketches on the same terms for the 6 mining leases in the Bellary Reserve Forest falling in District Anantpur, Andhra Pradesh and which are identified in the tabulated statement at pp. 27-29 of the CEC report dated 7-1-2011. For the purpose of the survey and preparation of the survey sketches, the Joint Team is authorised to co-opt one or more officers of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department and/or the Mining Department as special invitee(s). The mining operations, including transportation of minerals from those six mining leases, shall remain suspended till further orders by this Court.
Setting up of special purpose vehicle (SPV)
7. In Para 10(vi) of the amicus' note, it is stated as under:
“(vi). The State of Karnataka be directed to set up special purpose vehicle (SPV) for the purpose of ameliorative and mitigative measures as per the ‘comprehensive environment plans for the mining impact zone’ (Cepmiz) around mining leases in Bellary, Chitradurga and Tumkur. SPV would be under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka and would have senior officers of the departments concerned of the State Government as members. SPV would function in a transparent manner and the accounts of SPV would be subject to an annual audit by CAG. A detailed scheme containing the details of the works to be undertaken, process of selection of implementing agencies, accounting procedure and other details of Cepmiz may be directed to be prepared and submitted to this Hon'ble Court by the State of Karnataka, in consultation with CEC within four weeks. The amounts received/retained by the Monitoring Committee towards (a) 10% of the sale proceeds, (b) compensation, (c) other receivable be directed to be transferred to SPV (after its formation) for implementation of the provisions/prescriptions of Cepmiz.”
8. The formation of the special purpose vehicle and the drawing up and implementation of the comprehensive environment plans for mining impact zone is perhaps the most essential part in the process of reclamation and rehabilitation of the area devastated by illegal mining. In order to pass suitable directions in that regard, we need further inputs. We, accordingly, direct CEC to submit a detailed report in regard to the larger reclamation and rehabilitation programme to be undertaken by SPV, the phased manner in which the programme is aimed to be implemented and the total period over which the programme would be fully implemented, its estimated cost, both on the phased and the overall basis, and the sources from which the money required for implementation of the programme should come. The report may be filed by 10-10-2012.
9. CEC is at liberty to forward the representation dated 15-1-2012 received by it from M/s Laxmi Narayan Mining Company to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
IA No. … of 2012 in WP (C) No. 562 of 2009 and other connected matters
10. Put up on 12-10-2012 as first case.
IAs Nos. 3486-87 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995
11. Issue notice to MoEF and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), returnable on 19-10-2012.
12. Mr A.D.N Rao, Amicus appearing for CEC, accepts notice. Reply-affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks.
WP (C) No. 180 of 2011 (mentioned by Mr C.A Sundaram)
13. Put up on 5-10-2012 as first case.
WP (C) D. No. 32067 of 2012 (filed by Mr Prashant Bhushan) (Goa Foundation v. Union of India)
14. Put up on 5-10-2012 as second case.
Court Masters