Kerala High Court
Abdul Kareem vs State Level Environment Impact ... on 6 January, 2025
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
W.P.(C) No. 32379 of 2023
..1..
2025:KER:43
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 16TH POUSHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 32379 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
ABDUL KAREEM
AGED 64 YEARS, AL-FALAH, MANDAPAM,
VEMBAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 615.
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
ABDUL KAFOOR, S/O.SAIDUMUHAMMED PILLA,
ASYA MANZIL, THEKKADA, VEMBAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695615
BY ADVS.
PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU
NEENU BERNATH
SAJU S. DOMINIC
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE LEVEL ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT
AUTHORITY (SEIAA KERALA)
REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY,
4TH FLOOR, KSRTC BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 STATE LEVEL EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, 4 TH FLOOR,
KSRTC BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3 THE DIRECTOR
MINING AND GEOLOGY DIRECTORATE,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR, PATTOM PALACE P.O.,
TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695004
SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN - SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
06.12.2024, THE COURT ON 06.01.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 32379 of 2023
..2..
2025:KER:43
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a grantee of Ext.P1 Letter of Intent dated
01/02/2023 issued by the respondent No.3 for conducting
quarrying operations with respect to an extent of 1.5370
Hectares of land comprised under Block No.29, Re-survey No.
364/2, 364/3, 364/4, 364/6 and 364/8 of Manickal Village,
Nedumangad Taluk, Thiruvananthapuram District. The
petitioner's project is a category B2 project, since the applied
area is less than 5 Hectares.
2. Pursuant to Ext.P1, the petitioner has submitted
Ext.P4 application for Environmental Clearance. As part of
processing of the application, Ext.P4 was forwarded to the
respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 directed the petitioner
to apply for Terms of Reference and for conducting Environment
Impact Assessment Study as contemplated under the
provisions of Environment Impact Assessment Notification,
2006 (for short, 'EIA Notification, 2006') on the premise that a
cluster situation is formed since there are two quarries situated
..3..
2025:KER:43
within 500 meters from the periphery of the boundary of the
lease area of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the
leases of those quarries have expired in the year 2021 and
2022 and hence he is exempted from conducting any
Environment Impact Assessment Study or applying for Terms of
Reference. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has
approached this Court to give a direction to the respondents to
process the application for Environmental Clearance without
insisting to apply for Terms of Reference and conducting
Environment Impact Assessment Study.
3. I have heard Sri.Philip J. Vettickattu, the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.M.P.Sreekrishnan,
the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the direction of the respondent No.2 that the petitioner should
apply for Terms of Reference and conduct Environment Impact
Assessment Study is illegal and ultra vires to the provisions of
EIA Notification, 2006, inasmuch as his project is a category B2
..4..
2025:KER:43
project and exempted from scoping, Terms of Reference, and
Environment Impact Assessment Study. The learned counsel
further submitted that the leases of the two quarries situated
within 500 meters from the periphery of the boundary of the
lease area of the petitioner have expired and not operational
and therefore there is no reason to hold that a cluster is
formed.
5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for
respondent Nos. 1 and 2 Sri.M.P.Sreekrishnan submitted that
the adjacent two quarries within 500 meter radius from the
periphery of the boundary of the lease area of the petitioner
are not closed as per the mine closure plan and hence the two
quarries have to be considered while appraising the project of
the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel further submitted
that the Environment Impact Assessment Study for the project
is essential and for that the petitioner has to submit Terms of
Reference application.
6. It is not in dispute that the lease area of the
..5..
2025:KER:43
petitioner is less than 5 Hectares, which falls within the
category of B2 project. It is also not in dispute that the two
quarries situated within 500 meters from the periphery of the
boundary of the lease areas of the petitioner are non functional
quarries and the quarrying leases in respect of those quarries
have expired. Exts.P11 and P12 are the copies of the relevant
pages of quarrying lease in respect of those two quarries. A
perusal of Exts.P11 and P12 would show that the quarrying
leases have expired and the quarrying operations have also
come to an end. The failure on the part of the project
proponents of those quarries to file their closure plans cannot
be a reason for holding that such leases are alive. Going by the
relevant provisions of the EIA notification, the cluster situation
would arise only when the peripheries of one lease is less than
500 meters from the periphery of other leases in a
homogeneous mineral area. Thus, it is clear that what is
intended by relevant provisions of EIA notification, 2006 is only
operational lease and not expired lease. The stand taken by the
..6..
2025:KER:43
respondents that the project proponents of the above
mentioned two leases have not filed their closure plans cannot
be treated as a valid ground to hold that their leases are still
alive. There is no provision in the KMMC Rules, 2015 or in the
EIA notification, 2006 to that effect. The petitioner cannot be
penalized for the alleged defect committed by other
proponents. Therefore, the contention of the respondents that
a cluster is formed and therefore the petitioner has to apply for
Terms of Reference and to conduct Environment Impact
Assessment Study cannot be sustained. The petitioner being a
category B2 project, with less than 5 Hectares lease area, is
entitled to get his application processed and disposed of
without being insisted for any Terms of Reference or
Environment Impact Assessment Study.
7. For the reasons stated above, the respondents are
directed to finalise Ext.P4 application of the petitioner for
Environmental Clearance and dispose of the same without
insisting the petitioner to apply for Terms of Reference or
..7..
2025:KER:43
conducting the Environment Impact Assessment Study within
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
APA
..8..
2025:KER:43
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32379/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED 1-2-2023
ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR MINING & GEOLOGY
DEPARTMENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE APPROVED
MINING PLAN WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED QUARRY
PROJECT DATED 13-2-2023
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CLUSTER CERTIFICATE DATED 23-
2-2023
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 21-3-2022
ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
CLEARANCE SANS THE DOCUMENTS ANNEXED THERETO
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RISK
ASSESSMENT & DISASTER MANAGEMENT PLAN DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER AND THE CHELAN
SHOWING REMITTANCE OF FEE DATED 05-04-23
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE 144 TH
MEETING OF THE 2 ND RESPONDENT HELD ON 6 TH TO 8
TH JUNE, 2023
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 1-7-2023
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE MAIL DATED 01-07-2023 SENT BY
THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE 129 TH
MEETING WHICH HELD ON 26 TH AND 27 TH JULY, 2023
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE QUARRY
LEASE EXECUTED BETWEEN THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
..9..
2025:KER:43
AND M/S.VKL INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD, DATED 30-5-
2011, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 29-5-2021, OBTAINED BY
THE PETITIONER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE QUARRY
LEASE EXECUTED BETWEEN M/S.V.K.L. PROJETS INDIA
PVT. LTD. AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY DATED 4-4-
2012, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 3-4-2022, OBTAINED BY
THE PETITIONER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/07/2022 PASSED
BY THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SUPREME
COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO 6571/2022 DATED
23/09/2022
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE NATIONAL
GREEN TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI IN
R.P NO.35/2022 IN O.A NO.119/2022 DATED
15/11/2022
EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 782-
783/2023 DATED 03/02/2023
EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE OFFICIAL
PORTAL OF NGT, PRINCIPLE BENCH, NEW DELHI
CONCERNING THE O.A NO. 119/2022
