M.K. Janardhanam v. The District Collector. País/Territorio India Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte superior Fecha Jul 26, 2002 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal High Court of Madras Sede de la corte Madras Juez Sampath, K. Idioma Inglés Materia Recursos minerales Palabra clave Minería Derecho constitutional Participación pública Resumen The main writ petition is for a mandamus directing respondents to perform their statutory duty and obligations to stop illicit, illegal and unauthorized quarrying of sand and savudu from the riverbed and river bank of Kusasthalai River and the adjacent patta lands in Jagannathapuram and Inam Agaram villages, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District. This Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the river-bed, river bank, check dam, embankments, etc. and to file a detailed report about the alleged illegal activity going on perpetually. On 8-2-2000 this Court directed the respondents to ensure that the illegal quarrying was stopped forthwith. On 11-8-2001 the petitioner lodged a complaint in Sholavaram Police Station requesting the police to take necessary criminal proceedings against the persons indulging in the offence of theft of sand. Quarrying of sand was being done under the Karanodai Bridge on the GNT Road, which had been newly laid after the old bridge had fallen down due to enormous illicit quarrying of sand previously. In these circumstances, the contempt petition has been filed. As the writ petitioner produced several snap shots, which showed that the authorities had not been successful in checking the illicit activity, this Court passed an order directing the Advocate Commissioner to visit the area once again and to submit his report with necessary facts and figures and also sketches and photographs. The report states that there had been indiscriminate and large scale quarrying of sand, savudu and clay in different places and that unauthorized quarrying of sand had been continuing unabated. Sand mining has an adverse and destructive impact. Its disastrous effect is unimaginable. It has "crippled the riverine ecology and depleted the ground water table resulting in a nascent desertification process". The Court observed that the phrase used in Art 48A and Art 51A of the Constitution is protect and improve which implies that the phrase appears to contemplate affirmative governmental action to improve the quality of the environment and not just to preserve the environment in its degraded form. Therefore, the constitution makes two fold provisions - On one hand, it gives directive to the State for the protection and improvement of environment and on the other, it casts a duty on every citizen to help in the preservation of natural environment. Therefore it directed the Governement to constitute a high level committee which shall conduct a scientific survey with reference to sand quarrying in rivers and river beds in the State and submit a report with particular reference to the damage caused on account of indiscriminate and illegal quarrying and spelt out suitable remedial steps that the Government shall take, passing also suitable regulatory legislation. In the meantime there should be a total ban on sand quarrying anywhere near motor or rail bridges. While granting licence the local public should be allowed to air their views and raise their objections. Prosecution under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code for theft and causing damage to public property should be launched. Severe penalties should be imposed. They should also be made to pay heavy compensation. There should be a special river protection force mobilised for patrolling and policing the river areas and apprehending the culprits indulging in illicit quarrying. The Courts at the District level may be empowered to entertain complaints of sand mining, to direct investigation, appoint commissions to inspect and report and on being satisfied direct suspension of operations. Texto completo COU-156147.pdf Página web www.indiankanoon.org