Some other directions were also issued including directions for further inquiry by the CEC and the CEC was required to put up a companyprehensive report before this Court.
Against the said judgment of the High Court, the Government of Andhra Pradesh filed a Special Leave Petition, SLP C No.
It was also reported that there was massive illegal mining by third parties in the mining lease No.
723 dated 25th November, 2009, issued by the Industrial and Commercial Department, suspended the mining operations and also the transportation of mineral material by OMC and even other implicated companypanies, on the basis of the findings of a High Level Committee, headed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Hyderabad and the Report of the CEC submitted to this Court in I.A. No.
It was pointed by the CEC with specific reference to these companypanies that there was number only illegal extraction of iron ore but the minerals was being also extracted beyond the leased area specified in the lease deeds.
The case against the OMC for illegal mining was under investigation in respect of the areas of Obulapuram and Malangapudi villages of Anantpur district in the State of Andhra Pradesh and in the rest of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
They also prayed that both the States should also be directed demarcate the inter state boundaries, particularly, in the mining area.
As a result of vacation of the stay, the CBI companytinued its investigation.
202 of 1995 be carried out and the provisions of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 be implemented.
The draft numberification for the same was also placed before this Court on 9th September, 2002.
There was a companyplete lack of action on the part of the Ministry of Environment and Forests on the one hand and the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, on the other.
1111 of one M s. National Minerals Development Corporation NMDC .
It further sought that the orders passed by this Court in the W.P. C No.
After examining the issues raised in the IA, the earlier orders of this Court and based on the meetings held by the CEC on 20th March, 2012 and 11th April, 2012, respectively, the CEC identified the issues as follows The alleged serious illegalities irregularities and undue favour in respect of a the land purchased by the close relatives of the then Chief Minister, Karnataka for 0.40 crore in the year 2006 and subsequently sold to M s South West Mining Limited in the year 2010 for Rs.20.00 crores and b donation of Rs.20.00 crore received by Prerna Education Society from M s South West Mining Limited.
This probably came to be stayed by the High Court vide its order dated 12th December, 2009 which stay was vacated by another order of that Court on 16th December, 2010 paving the way for a full fledged probe.
dated 17th November, 2009, supplemented by Notification No.
The Court also numbered that illegally extracted iron ore belonging to one M s. Associated Mining Company for short AMC was apparently routed through the nearest Port in Vishakhapatnam, through district Anantpur in Andhra Pradesh.
Vide its order dated 9th September, 2002 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India Ors.
It may be numbericed here that, it was in furtherance to the order of the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.M No.
The latter cases, Writ Petition Civil No.
Vide the same order, this Court required the CBI to additionally present a status report of investigations which the CBI had undertaken in respect of OMC in Andhra Pradesh under FIR No.
17A/2009 CBI Hyderabad .
467, Home SCA Dept.
The CBI also filed a charge sheet in a special companyrt against the OMC, in an illegal mining case falling within the State of Karnataka, charging the accused under Sections 120B, 409, 420, 468 and Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short IPC read with the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Thus, the Court felt that the CBI should examine the alleged illegalities.
7366 7367/2010, relate to protection of environment, forest areas, stoppage of illegal mining and cancellation of illegal sub leasing and companytracts executed by any State Government in favour of the third parties, to the extent such companytracts are invalid and improper.
2/2009 in Writ Petition Civil No.
The CEC filed two companyprehensive reports before this Court, one dated 20th April, 2012 and other dated 27th April, 2012, both in Writ Petition Civil No.
1 in the Report dated 20th April, 2012, while issue Nos.
This inaction and callousness on the part of the Central and the State Governments and failure on their part to companytrol the illegal mining has allowed large scale destruction, both of forest and number forest lands and has adversely affected the livelihood of the people.
Such illegal mining and transportation of illegally mined minerals were being done in companynivance with the officials, politicians and even Ministers of State.
It was suspected that one M s. Deccan Mining Syndicate for short DMS was involved in such activities and numberaction had been taken on the companyplaints of NMDC.
It was averred that there was companyplete breakdown of the official machinery, thereby allowing such blatant illegalities to take place.
After approval, the Court directed that a formal numberification will be issued within a week and the functions and responsibilities given to the CEC were to be exercised by the said Statutory Committee.
202/1995, 562/2009 and SLP C No.
562 of 2009 and SLP C Nos.
In fact, this Notification was issued on 17th September, 2002.
While passing an order of companyplete ban on mining activity in these areas vide order dated 29th July, 2011 this Court sought submissions on the market requirement for mined ore and vide order dated 5th August, 2011 permitted only M s. National Minerals Development Corporation Ltd. for short NMDC to carry out very limited mining activity, so that the economic interest of the companyntry and of the states does number suffer irretrievably.
This related to the quantum, quality and transportation of ore as well.
All the above cases, i.e., W.P. C No.
Further, there were serious allegations raised in these petitions as to how and the manner in which the leases were executed and mining permits were granted or renewed for carrying out the mining activities stated in the petition.
228/61/2009 AVD 11 dated 1st December, 2009 issued by the Central Government, that the CBI was directed to register a case against the Obulapuram Mining Company OMC .
ii the alleged illegal export of iron ore from Belekeri Port and associated issues iii alleged export from Krishapatnam and Chennai Port after exports were banned by the State of Karnataka and iv transfer of senior police officers on deputation to Lokayukta, Karnataka.
Samaj Parivartan Samuday, a registered society, filed petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India stating that the illegal mining in the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka was still going on in full swing.
These violations have companye to the surface as a result of enquiries companyducted by the CEC, regarding illegal mining and mining beyond their leased areas by these companypanies.
Earlier the CBI had registered a case against the OMC on 7th December, 2009 and started the probe.
201 of 2009, a companyy of which was forwarded to the State Government.
Further, there was unchecked export of iron ore from the border areas of the two States, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.
Further, the State of Andhra Pradesh vide its G.O. Rt.
The CEC companystituted by this Court was proposed to be companyverted into a Statutory Committee.
It thus, has filed WP C 562 of 2009 and has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respective State Governments and to the Union of India, to stop all mining and related activities in the forest areas of these two States.
2 to 4 were dealt with in the Report dated 27th April, 2012.
In furtherance to the said order, the Government framed a numberification in terms of Section 33 of the Environment Protection Act, 1996.
The CEC was required to submit quarterly reports, which it has been submitting and with the passage of time, large irregularities and illegalities companypled with criminality were brought to the numberice of this Court.
The CEC, in discharge of its functions and responsibilities, was examining the matters, in both the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.
562 of 2009.
P. C No.
This was challenged before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which, vide judgment dated 26th February, 2010, set aside the numberification and allowed the writ petitions, while holding that the G.O. issued by the Government suffered from a jurisdictional error and was in violation of the principles of natural justice.
In addition to this general companycern for the environment, the order of this Court dated 9th September, 2002, this Court numbered violations of its Orders and directed that the CEC shall monitor implementation of all orders of the Court and shall place before it any unresolved cases of number compliance, including in respect of the encroachments, removals, implementations of working plans, companypensatory afforestation, plantations and other companyservation issues.
7366 7367 of 2010 companycern the Bellary Forest Reserve.
The prayer in this application was to extend the scope of investigation by the CBI relating to illegal mining and other allied activities which the politicians and major companyporate groups including M s. Jindal Group and M s. Adanis were indulging in, within the State of Karnataka.
202 of 1995, this Court companystituted the CEC to examine and monitor the various activities infringing the laws protecting the environment and also the preventive or punitive steps that may be required to be taken to protect the environment.
7366 7367 of 2010 on different grounds.
In the meanwhile, an application was filed by the petitioners of writ petition No.562 of 2009 which remained un numbered.
