Illegal mining in Baddi: Permission granted to contractor was void, Amicus tells NGT

Indian Express

03-05-2025

Sand and soil were mined at Mauza Khol in industrial town of Baddi in Himachal Pradesh‵s Solan without obtaining the mandatory environmental clearance. The mining permission granted to contractor Gurdyal Singh by the Director of Industries, Himachal Pradesh, was void ab initio (void from the beginning) and a construction firm, which supplied the mined material, and the Railways, which used it, are liable for failing to ensure compliance with environmental safeguards.
These are among the key facts highlighted in a detailed report filed by amicus curiae Ritwik Parikh with the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
The Tribunal had appointed Parikh as amicus curiae to assist in a matter pertaining to case where one Vijay Chandel, a local resident, moved a letter petition in the NGT last year alleging that Gurdyal Singh illegally mined soil from a hill slope along a road leading from Sheetalpur to Dashomajra.
The NGT in an order in March had directed the Himachal Pradesh government to recover to recover an environmental penalty of Rs 1.08 crore from violators within 60 days and deposit it with the HPSPCB to be utilised for environmental restoration.
The Director of Industries, Dr Yunus, confirmed that the amount has been deposited with the Department of Environment, Science & Technology. However, no subsequent report detailing the actual restoration work has been filed. The Amicus, in his report, has now recommended that the Tribunal direct the department to submit a detailed action plan and timeline to ensure proper remediation of the site.
Meanwhile, in an affidavit, Dr Yunus submitted that contractor Gurdayal Singh was granted the permission for carrying out mining following due course. 'Mining activities in state are regulated under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, and the Himachal Pradesh Minor Mineral (Concession) and Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2015. Rule 33 of these rules allows the disposal of minor minerals generated incidentally during non-mining activities such as plot development, road construction, and tunnel excavation,‶ read the affidavit.
It adds that Gurdyal Singh had applied for permission to level a plot measuring 13-17 bighas in Mauza Khol. After scrutiny of the application and inspection a joint inspection comprising officials from the Revenue, PWD, and Mining departments, recommended allowing the sale of 49,992 metric tonne (MT) of minor minerals — 29,995 MT sand and 19,997 MT soil. 'Permission was formally granted on January 14, 2023,‶ it said, further adding that following due procedure under Rule 33, it had issued seven similar permissions in the Baddi sub-division over the past two financial years. The affidavit underscores that the material excavated was a by-product of approved development activities, not commercial mining, and was regulated through a defined procedural framework to prevent illegal mining.
In his report, however, the amicus curiae noted that the mining permission granted to Gurdyal Singh was in blatant violation of environmental laws, as no prior EC had been secured. He cited that the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and the EIA Notification of 2006, mandate EC for all mining projects, regardless of their size. 'The law is crystal clear: no mining of minor minerals—whether over large or small areas—can proceed without prior Environmental Clearance,' read the report.
The amicus curiae, also highlighted lapses by M/s Singla Construction, the sub-contractor responsible for procurement of the mined materials, and the Railways, the project authority. Both had failed to verify the statutory clearances required for the sand and soil used in their projects. 'This amounts to a serious lapse in due diligence and renders the entire chain of extraction, supply, and use legally unsustainable,' the report said.
It further pointed out that the 'responsibility also extends to the Railways, as the project authority, who were under an obligation to ensure that all materials sourced by their contractor‶ were compliant with environmental regulations. 'Failure to ensure the production of the required EC certificates renders the entire chain of extraction, supply, and use of the minerals legally unsustainable and environmentally non -compliant.'
'Therefore, the mining activity carried out by Gurdyal Singh…is entirely unlawful, having been undertaken without the requisite EC. The mining permission granted by the Director of Industries…is void ab initio, and and both M/s Singla Construction and the Railways ) are liable for failing to ensure compliance with mandatory environmental safeguards‶.