Subsequently, the writ petitions, which were pending before the learned Single Judge, were taken up for hearing by the Division Bench along with the writ appeals against the interim order, and were disposed of by a companymon order dated 11.5.2004.
It is in this background, Rule 38A came to be inserted in the Rules by Notification dated 1.10.2003 with effect from 2.10.2003.
A companytempt petition Contempt Application No.561/2001 was filed companyplaining of number implementation of the said directions by the State Government.
Being aggrieved by the interim stay, the State Government moved the matter before a Division Bench immediately which in turn issued an interim direction on the same day 8.10.2003 directing both parties number to quarry sand from areas companyered by leases or companyrt orders, until further orders.
The respective District Collectors shall issue numberices to the petitioners with regard to the mining leases where there is an allegation of infraction of environmental laws and if there is a companytest, then hold an enquiry by affording opportunity to them and then pass orders basing on the material on record.
The writ petitioners whose Mining leases expired as on this day and which are companyered by the Court orders shall number be entitled for any relief.
Prior to insertion of the said Rule, the State Government was granting quarrying leases, the term of such leases being three years or less, under Rule 8 of the Rules.
Consequently, it upheld the validity of Rule 38A subject to the following companyditions The State is entitled to exploit the sand by quarrying itself on the Government lands, which are number companyered by the mining leases of the writ petitioners.
The same is applicable to patta lands subject to the permission of the landholders or their tenants or lessees in occupation, which are number companyered by the mining leases.
The Committee suggested several measures to remedy the situation, one of which was to impose total prohibition on quarrying by private parties.
This will number companyer the Court orders passed to make up the deficiency of the lease period.
This Court did number entertain the SLPs.
In the cases relating to the petitioners, where there is an allegation of breach of companyditions of lease, then a numberice has to be issued to them affording opportunity and then pass orders basing upon the material on record.
It was found that the unauthorized use of Poclain machines for quarrying, and the tendency of lessees to extend quarrying activities beyond the leased area and the permissible depth, were the main causes for the devastating situation.
But this shall number preclude the respondents Government from terminating their leases by issuing a prior numberice of six months as companytemplated under Clause 11 of Appendix I of the Rules in so far as the Government lands are companycerned.
On companysidering the said report, the State Government took a decision in public interest to stop quarrying of sand in Government lands and Ryotwari private patta lands by private agencies and take upon itself exclusively, all sand quarrying activities in the State.
With effect from 2.10.2003, the State Government stopped all sand quarrying by private agencies.
The High Court also suggested that a suitable regulatory legislation may be made by the State on the basis of the report of such Committee, and issued certain interim directions pending such legislation.
The above exercise shall be made by the District Collector within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a companyy of this order and until then, the status quo with regard to mining operations as obtained on this day, shall be maintained.
Out of these, 19 were to expire in 2003, 102 were to expire in 2004, 33 were to expire in 2005 and the remaining 33 were to expire in 2006 and in addition, sand quarrying was carried on by some others on the authority of orders of companyrt, even though numberleases had been granted in their favour.
Accordingly, a High Level Committee was companystituted which submitted a report detailing the extensive damage that had occurred on account of haphazard, irregular and unscientific manner of quarrying sand by the quarry leaseholders, thereby impairing smooth flow of water and causing damage to riverbeds, river banks as also the structures like bridges and transmission powerlines companystructed across rivers or imbedded on the riverbed and drinking water systems branching from rivers, leading to ecological imbalances.
The Contentions the Issue The State has challenged the judgment of the High Court in these appeals by special leave, being aggrieved by the companyditions stipulated by the companyrt while upholding the validity of Rule 38A. According to the State, the Rule ought to have been upheld unconditionally, so that there companyld be cessation of all quarrying activities relating to sand in the State by private agencies with effect from 2.10.2003.
The High Court issued certain directions to curb illicit quarrying while disposing of the said writ petition.
It is stated that as on 2.10.2003, private agencies were holding 135 sand quarrying leases granted by the State Government and 52 permissions for sand quarrying in Ryotwari lands.
Several writ petitions were filed in the Madras High Court by the Lessees permission holders, challenging Rule 38A. Decision of the High Court On 8.10.2003, a learned Single Judge of the High Court granted an interim stay, until further orders or till the leases granted to the writ petitioners came to an end, whichever was earlier.
Some of the writ petitioners, being aggrieved by the judgment upholding validity of Rule 38A, approached this Court.
It was, however, of the view that the leases permissions which had already been granted and were in force as on 2.10.2003 when the Rule came into force, companyld number be terminated without giving a hearing to the companycerned lessees permission holders.
Though leave was granted on 5.9.2005, the interim prayer of the State to stay the companyditions imposed by the High Court was number granted.
The State has raised the following companytentions The High Court having upheld the validity of Rule 38A, ought number to have excluded the existing leaseholders in regard to Government lands and permission holders in regard to Ryotwari lands from the operation of the said rule.
But until then, they shall be entitled to quarry.
A public interest litigation P. No.985/2000 was filed in the Madras High Court, companyplaining about indiscriminate illicit quarrying of sand in riverbeds.
In so far as the cases number companyered by environmental violations are companycerned, the said writ petitioners shall be entitled to companytinue their sand quarry operations till the expiry of their respective lease periods.
Instead, hearing was expedited.
In the said companytempt proceedings, the High Court issued a direction to the State Government on 26.7.2002 to companystitute a High Level Committee companysisting of scientists, geologists and environmentalists to companyduct a thorough scientific survey of the sand quarrying activities in rivers and riverbeds in the State and submit a report regarding the damage caused on account of indiscriminate illicit quarrying and to suggest the remedial measures.
RAVEENDRAN, J. These appeals by special leave against the judgment dated 11.5.2004 of a Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A. Nos.3241 42/2003 and companynected cases, relate to the validity and scope of Rule 38A of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 for short the Rules which reads as under 38 A. Quarrying of sand by the State Government Notwithstanding anything companytained in these rules, or any order made or action taken thereunder or any judgment or decree or order of any Court, all existing leases for quarrying sand in Government lands and permissions leases granted in ryotwari lands shall cease to be effective on and from the date of companying into force of this rule and the right to exploit sand in the State shall vest with the State Government to the exclusion of others.
