Protection Of Defence Land From Illegal Mining Is 'Continuing Statutory Obligation': Chhattisgarh High Court In Suo Moto PIL
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that protection of Defence land from illegal mining and prevention of unlawful excavation of minor minerals constitute a continuing statutory obligation of the authorities concerned. The Court observed that although the purpose of the present suo motu public interest litigation had been substantially achieved through coordinated action by the Union and...
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that protection of Defence land from illegal mining and prevention of unlawful excavation of minor minerals constitute a continuing statutory obligation of the authorities concerned. The Court observed that although the purpose of the present suo motu public interest litigation had been substantially achieved through coordinated action by the Union and State authorities, the obligation to maintain strict vigilance over Defence land continues, and any future lapse or recurrence of illegal excavation may warrant revival of the proceedings.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal was dealing with a suo motu public interest litigation initiated on the basis of newspaper reports alleging large-scale illegal excavation of murum from Army land at village Telsara near Chakarbhatha Airport, Bilaspur, and its use in the development of private residential colonies. Taking note of the seriousness of the allegations, the Court had issued notice to the Union of India and the State authorities, impleaded one of the allegedly benefiting colonisers, and directed the filing of personal affidavits by the concerned authorities.
During the proceedings, the State Government informed the Court that notices had been issued to the concerned builders and colonisers, physical inspections had been carried out, royalty slips and transit passes were being scrutinised, and their genuineness verified. It further disclosed that joint teams had been constituted for regular patrolling, temporary check-posts had been established to curb illegal transportation of minor minerals, and scientific methods had been adopted to ascertain whether the murum used in the colonies originated from Defence land.
The Court noted that laboratory reports prepared by the Public Works Department found that the murum samples collected from the identified colonies were not similar to the samples taken from the Defence land. It also took note of the State's affidavit disclosing registration of cases wherever illegal excavation or transportation of minor minerals was detected under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
Upon considering the affidavits, laboratory reports and other material on record, the Court found that prompt and coordinated action had been taken by the respondent authorities through joint patrolling, verification of royalty documents, scientific examination of murum samples and initiation of proceedings against violators.
The Court observed that the objective of the suo motu PIL was not confined to examining the newspaper allegations but also to ensuring effective protection of Defence land and evolving an administrative mechanism to prevent recurrence of such incidents. Since these objectives had been substantially achieved and no further instance of illegal mining had been reported, continued judicial monitoring was considered unnecessary.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the suo motu public interest litigation while clarifying that protection of Defence land and prevention of illegal mining remain continuing statutory obligations of the authorities. It further observed that if any serious lapse, negligence or recurrence of illegal excavation from Defence land is brought to the Court's notice in future, it would be open to revive the proceedings and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Case Title: In Re: Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation v. UOI & Ors. [WPPIL No. 111 of 2024]