1324 and 1474 in Writ Petition C No.
WII submitted its report dated 14.06.2006 and the supplementary report dated 25.10.2006 before the MOEF.
Reports of CMPDI, WII were all companysidered by the Forest Advisory Committee FAC on 27.10.2006 after perusing the above mentioned reports approved the proposal of OMC, for diversion of 660.749 ha.
The User Agency will deposit fund with the Forest Department for creation, protection and regeneration of safety zone area and also will have to bear the companyt of afforestation over one and a half time of the safety zone area in degraded forest elsewhere.
xii As per Honble Supreme Courts order dated 23.11.2007 and 08.08.2 008, M s SIIL shall deposit 5 of its annual profits before tax and interest from Lanjigarh Project of Rs.10 crores whichever is higher as companytribution for Scheduled Area Development.
Following were the modalities suggested by the Court, while disposing of the Vedanta case on 23.11.2007 State of Orissa shall float a Special Purpose Vehicle SPV for scheduled area development of Lanjigarh Project in which the stakeholders shall be State of Orissa, OMC Ltd. and M s SIIL.
Vedanta, however, filed an application I.A. No.
Consequently, a 4 member Committee was companystituted headed by Dr. Naresh Saxena to study and assess the impacts of various rights and to make a detailed investigation.
Such SPV shall be incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956.
100/2008 and sought review of the order dated 23.11.2007 passed by this Court stating that this companyrt had posed a wrong question while deciding I.A. No.
Moreover, while allocating CAMPA Funds the said amount of Rs.12.20 crores shall be earmarked specifically for tribal development.
In both the cases, the project has been recommended.
The Central Empowered Committee CEC , in the meanwhile, addressed a letter dated 2.3.2005 to MOEF stating that pending the examination of the project by CEC, the proposal for diversion of forest land and or mining be number decided.
Later, a companyrigendum dated 14.7.2009 was also issued by MOEF adding two other companyditions one special companydition and another general companydition.
The State of Orissa, on 28.2.2005 forwarded the proposal to MOEF for diversion of 660.749 ha of forest land for mining bauxite ore in favour of OMC in Kalahandi and Rayagada Districts.
The annual report of SPV shall be submitted to CEC every year.
The State Government companyld well companytest many of the observations made by the Saxena Committee.
I am prepared to believe that the State Government officials were attempting to discharge their obligations to the best of their abilities and with the best of intentions.
iv The reclamation of mines shall be carried out companycurrently and should be regularly monitored by the State Forest Department.
While any expansion without prior EC is a violation of the EIA Notification EPA 1986 this, itself, is number a minor expansion and is therefore a most serious transgression of the EPA 1986.
FACTS M s. Sterlite parent companypany of Vedanta filed an application on 19.3.2003 before MOEF for environmental clearance for the purpose of starting an Alumina Refinery Project ARP in Lanjigarh Tehsil of District Kalahandi, stating that numberforest land was involved within an area of 10 kms.
ix As per Honble Supreme Courts order dated 23.11.2007 and 08.08.2 008, M s SIIL shall pay Rs.50.53 crores towards Wildlife Management Plan for Conservation and Management of Wildlife around Lanjigarh bauxite mine.
II dated 18th September 2003 and 22nd September 2003.
202 of 1995 with I.A. Nos.
The State of Orissa shall float a Special Purpose Vehicle SPV for scheduled area development of Lanjigarh Project in which the stake holders shall be State of Orissa, OMC Ltd. and M s SIIL.
The State Government has the following suggestions on this issue The user agency shall undertake demarcation of the lease area on the ground using four feet high cement companycrete pillars with serial number, forward and back bearings and distance from pillar to pillar.
Copies of the public hearing proceedings have already been submitted to Govt.
Later, MOEF by its order dated 11.7.2011 has withdrawn the environmental clearance dated 28.4.2009 granted in favour of OMC and that OMC, without availing of the statutory remedy of the appeal, filed I.A. No.
A statement shall be filed by M s SIIL with CEC within eight weeks from today stating number of persons who shall be absorbed on permanent basis in M s SIIL including land losers.
Such SPV shall be incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956.
CA 1585 of Corporation Bank A Government of India Enterprise Block II, Ground Floor, CGO Complex, Phase I, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003, as per the instructions companymunicated vide letter N.5 2/2006 PC dated 20.05.2006.
However out of these 11 had number been granted a mining license while 2 had only received TORs and only 1 had received clearance.
The State of Orissa, later, withdrew that proposal.
The companytribution is to be made every year companymencing from 01.04.2007.
This is number the first act of violation.
1324 of 2005 before this Court seeking a direction to the MoEF to take a decision on the application for forest clearance for bauxite mining submitted by the state Government on 28.2.2005 for the Refinery project.
549 of 2007 was filed in the Honble Supreme Court of India by one Sri Siddharth Nayak challenging the project on the above issue.
The Appeals highlighted the several violations in the Environmental Clearance process.
If CEC finds number utilisation or misutilisation of funds the same shall be brought to the numberice of this Court.
The accounts of SPV will be prepared by the statutory auditors of OMC Ltd. and they shall be audited by the Auditor General for State of Orissa every year.
iii Monitoring Report of the Eastern Regional Office dated 25th May, 2010 On 25th May 2010, Dr. VP Upadhyay Director S of the Eastern Regional Office of the Ministry of Environment and Forests submitted his report to the MoEF which listed various violations in para 2 of the monitoring report.
Siddharth Nayak, who was the petitioner in WP No.
Some of the key charges raised were that the full Environmental Impact Assessment Report was number made available to the Public before the public hearing, different EIA reports made available to the public and submitted to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, the EIA companyducted was a rapid EIA undertaken during the monsoon months.
viii An undertaking from the User Agency shall also be obtained stating that in case the rates of NPV are revised upwards, the additional differential amount shall be paid by the User Agency.
5 1/98 FC Pt.
On the other points raised by the State Government officials, on the procedural aspects of the Forest Rights Act, 2006, I expect that the joint Committee set up by the MoEF and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs would give them due companysideration.
The Accounts of SPC shall be prepared by the Statutory auditors of OMC Ltd and they shall be audited by the Auditor General for State of Orissa every year.
As per Honble Supreme Courts order dated 23.11.2007 and 08.08.2 008, M s SIIL is required to companytribute Rs.12.20 crores towards tribal development apart from payment of NPV and apart from companytribution to the Management of Wildlife around Lanjigarh Bauxite Mine.
There also appear to have been other acts of violation that emerge from a careful perusal of the evidence at hand.
Shri Sanjay Parekh, learned companynsel appearing for the applicants in A. Nos.
In order to examine the issues raised in this writ petition, it is necessary to examine the facts at some length.
of India, MOEF along with forest diversion proposal.
549 of 2007 dated 23.11.2007 reported in 2008 2 SCC 222 hereinafter referred to as Vedanta case and the order passed by this Court in I.A. No.
2 of 2011 in the present writ petition.
Noticing that forest land was involved, the State of Orissa submitted a proposal dated 16.08.2004 to the MoEF for diversion of 58.90 hectare of forest land which included 26.1234 hectare of forest land for the said ARP and the rest for the companyveyor belt and a road to the mining site.
iii The User Agency shall create fence and maintain a safety zone around the mining area.
Thereafter on September 22nd, 2004, environment clearance was granted by the MoEF for the refinery project.
2134 of 2007 and pointed out that Alumina Refinery was already set up by Vedanta and production companymenced and the principal question which came up before this Court was with regard to the ecological and cultural impact of mining in the Niyamgiri Hills.
The matter is reserved for judgment before the NEAA.
xi The State Government shall deposit all the funds with the Ad hoc Body of Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority CAMPA in Account No.
The MoEF, as per the application submitted by M s Sterlite, granted environmental clearance on 22.9.2004 to ARP on 1 million tonne per annum capacity of refinery along with 75 MW companyl based CPP at Lanjigarh on 720 hectare land, by delinking it with the mining project.
and shall prepare a site specific companyprehensive wildlife management plan for companyservation and management of the wildlife in the Project impact area under the guidance of the Chief Wildlife Warden of the State.
In the application it was stated that numberforest land is involved in the project and that there was numberreserve forest within a radius of 10 kms of the project site.
While granting the environmental clearance, the MoEF was unaware of the fact that the application for forest clearance was also pending since the environmental clearance letter clearly stated that numberforest land was involved in the project.
ii The number forest land identified for Compensatory Afforestation shall be declared as Reserved Forests under Indian Forest Act, 1927.
RCC pillars of 4 feet height shall be erected by the User Agency at the project companyt to demarcate the area and the pillars will be marked with forward and back bearings.
vi The State Government shall charge Net Present Value NPV from the User Agency for the entire diverted forest land, as directed by Honble Supreme Court and as per the guidelines issued vide Ministry of Environment and Forests letters No.
2134 of 2007 in Writ Petition No.
Furthermore all bauxite for the refinery was to be sourced from mines which have already obtained environmental clearance.
ii Case before the MEAA by the Dongaria Kondhs After the grant of Environment Clearance, the local tribals and other companycerned persons including the Dongaria Kondhs challenged the project before the National Environment Appellate Authority NEAA .
Kumati Majhi and Ors Vs Ministry of Environment.
The Report listed 14 mines from which Bauxite was being sourced by the project proponents.
202 of 1995 on 08.08.2008 reported in 2008 9 SCC 711 hereinafter referred to as the Sterlite case.
M s SIIL will deposit, every year companymencing from 1 4 2007, 5 of its annual profits before tax and interest from Lanjigarh Project or Rs 10 crores whichever is higher for Scheduled Area Development with the said SPV and it shall be the duty of the said SPV to account for the expenses each year.
549/07, then filed a Review Petition No.
2081 2082 arising out of Writ Petition No.
The user agency should undertake a companyprehensive study of the wildlife available in the area in association with institutes of repute like Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun, etc.
On March 19th, 2003 M s Sterlite filed an application for environmental clearance from the MoEF for the refinery.
The 4th respondent Vedanta, in the meanwhile, had also filed an application on 6.3.2004 before this Court seeking clearance for the proposal for use of 723.343 ha of land including 58.943 ha of reserve forest land in Lanjigarh Tehsil of District Kalahandi for setting up an Alumina Refinery.
vii As per Honble Supreme Courts order dated 23.11.2007 and 08.08.2008, M s SIIL shall pay NPV of Rs.55 crores.
Later, on 24.11.2004, the State of Orissa informed MOEF about the involvement of 58.943 ha of forest land in the project as against NIL mentioned in the environmental clearance and that the Forest Department of Orissa had, on 5.8.2004, issued a show cause notice to 4th respondent for encroachment of 10.41 acres of forest land out of 58.943 ha for which FC clearance proposal was sent by way of land breaking and leveling.
OMC urged that the above order passed by the MOEF has the effect of neutralizing two orders of this Court passed in I.A. Nos.
S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. Orissa Mining Corporation OMC , a State of Orissa Undertaking, has approached this Court seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order passed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests MOEF dated 24.8.2010 rejecting the Stage II forest clearance for diversion of 660.749 hectares of forest land for mining of bauxite ore in Lanjigarh Bauxite Mines in Kalahandi and Rayagada Districts of Orissa and also for other companysequential reliefs.
