Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kapura Ram vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:15912) on 26 March, 2025
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:15912]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6504/2025
Kapura Ram S/o Sh. Lumba Ram, Aged About 49 Years, Resident
Of Bera, District Pali (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through Secretary To The Government,
Ministry Of Environment, Forest And Climate Change,
New Delhi.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Mines And Geology, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Department Of Mines And Geology, Khanij
Bhawan, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Sojat
City, Rajasthan.
5. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Forest And Environment, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
6. Deputy Conservator Of Forest, Department Of Forest And
Environment, Pali, Rajasthan.
7. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, SA- 6 Mandia
Road, Industrial Area, Pali Through Its Regional Officer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.S. Sandhu with
Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Rathore.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sajjan Singh Rathore, AAG
Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG
Mr. Manoj Bhandari, Sr. Advocate.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
26/03/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order
dated 04.12.2024, whereby, the Rajasthan State Pollution Control
Board has revoked the Consent to Operate under the provisions of
[2025:RJ-JD:15912] (2 of 4) [CW-6504/2025]
Section 21(4) of the Air Act, 1981 and Section 25/26 of the Water
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
is having a mining lease and is undertaking mining operations on
the area leased by the State Government. He further submits that
the mining area is at a distance of 8.5 Kms from the boundary of
the Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary. He also submits that the
revocation of the Consent to Operate is in contradiction to the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. Union of India & Ors.
reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 504, more particularly, the
paragraph No.58 to 61 of the judgment.
4. Learned counsel also submits that even as per the draft
notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and
Climate Change on 18.06.2020, the condition No.1 specifically
stipulates prohibition of mining activities within 5.0 Kms from the
Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) i.e. 0 (zero) to 5.0 Kms from the
boundary of Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary. He, therefore,
submits that in view of the draft notification and the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the consent to operate cannot be
withdrawn by the respondents. He, therefore, prays that the writ
petition may be allowed and the order dated 04.12.2024 may be
quashed and set aside.
5. Per contra, Mr. Sajjan Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the
Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board submits that the order
dated 04.12.2024 has been passed keeping in mind the
stipulations made in the Environmental Clearance Certificate
issued by the State Level Environment Impact Assessment
[2025:RJ-JD:15912] (3 of 4) [CW-6504/2025]
Authority, Rajasthan on 01.08.2022. Learned counsel for the
respondents further submits that as per the paragraph No.4 of the
statutory compliances, since the project of the petitioner falls
within 10 Kms from the boundary of a Wildlife Sanctuary and the
final ESZ notification has not been issued so far and the petitioner
has not obtained clearance from the Standing Committee of
National Board for Wildlife as per the O.M. dated 08.08.2019 of
the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change,
therefore, the respondents have revoked the Consent to Operate.
Mr. Sajjan Singh Rathore, learned AAG, therefore, submits that
the order passed by the respondent authorities is perfectly
justified and no interference is warranted by this Court.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the State Level
Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Rajasthan for
modification/reviewing the environmental clearance given to him
vide order dated 01.08.2022 in the wake of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court stated above and the draft notification
dated 18.06.2020 issued by the Ministry of Environment and
Forest and Climate Change. He further prays that the State Level
Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Rajasthan may be
directed to decide such application/representation within a
stipulated period.
7. In view of the discussion made above, the instant writ
petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach
the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority,
Rajasthan by moving an appropriate application/representation for
modification of the conditions mentioned in the statutory
[2025:RJ-JD:15912] (4 of 4) [CW-6504/2025]
compliances as well as any other conditions mentioned in the
environment clearance dated 01.08.2022 which according to the
petitioner are in violation of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court and the draft notification dated 18.06.2020 issued by the
Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change.
8. In the event of filing such application/representation by the
petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided by the State
Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Rajasthan
expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of such application/representation, strictly in
accordance with law.
9. Needless to say, the petitioner will be at liberty to file fresh
writ petition, if occasion so arises.
10. Stay application as well as other pending misc. applications,
if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
67-Shahenshah/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
