Do Minor Mineral Rules Stipulate Action Against Contractor For Indulging In Illegal Mining Beyond Scope Of Contract: Gauhati HC Asks State
The Gauhati High Court on Monday (February 10) asked the State Authorities, whether there is any provision under the existing mineral rules for taking action against the erring contractor, who has flouted the conditions of the lease or has illegally extracted the minor minerals out of the scope of the contract. The division bench comprising the Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and...
The Gauhati High Court on Monday (February 10) asked the State Authorities, whether there is any provision under the existing mineral rules for taking action against the erring contractor, who has flouted the conditions of the lease or has illegally extracted the minor minerals out of the scope of the contract.
The division bench comprising the Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair was hearing a PIL raising a grievance against a contractor, alleging that he indulged in illegal mining out of the scope of the contract granted to him for collecting stones, sand and gravel from Rowta Sand & Gravel Mahal.
In due course, the scope of the PIL was extended and the State Government was directed to frame comprehensive guidelines to check the illegal mining in the State of Assam.
The Standing Counsel appearing for the Forest Department submitted that or the purpose of restraining the illegal mining in Assam, the State Government has already drafted a new minor mineral rules titled as “The Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2024” and the same will be implemented as soon as it is approved in accordance with law.
It was further submitted that in the new rules several provisions have been made to stop illegal mining in the State of Assam and it is expected that those provisions will take care of the menace of illegal mining.
The Court noted that in the inspection report prepared by the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Administration & Vigilance) in the office of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Head of Forests Force, Assam, it is clearly reflected that the allegations levelled against the erring contractor, are found to be true.
However, the Court was informed that no action has been taken against the said contractor because by the time when this PIL was filed and notices were issued to the respondents, the contract period had been over.
“It is very strange that though the respondents have found that the contractor indulged in illegal mining, no panel action has been taken against him and the plea taken for not taking any action against the contractor is that the contract period has already been over,” the Court said.
Thus, the Court directed the respondents to clarify whether under the existing minor mineral rules or the guidelines there is any provision for taking action against the erring contractor, who has flouted the conditions of the lease or has illegally extracted the minor minerals out of the scope of the contract, or not.
Case Title: Arun Narzary v. The Bodoland Territorial Council & 4 Ors.
Case No.: PIL/70/2021
