Karnataka High Court Upholds Govt Resolution Suspending Quarrying Leases Falling Within 1 Km Of Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary
The Karnataka High Court has upheld a government resolution dated 29th September 2022 which suspend fourteen quarry leases located within one kilometre boundary of Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary.A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by SR Bellary and others against the resolution passed by District Task Force Committee...
The Karnataka High Court has upheld a government resolution dated 29th September 2022 which suspend fourteen quarry leases located within one kilometre boundary of Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by SR Bellary and others against the resolution passed by District Task Force Committee (Mines), Gadag District. It said,
“The Kappatgudda Wildlife Sanctuary is a notified Sanctuary and the distance of one kilometre has to be observed, treating it as a prohibited area in which mining activities cannot be allowed. It is also to be noted that the preservation of one kilometre from the protected area is irrespective of the eco-sensitive zone Notification.”
One of the petitioners argued that it was granted a licence for ordinary building stone quarry in 3 acres of land from 10th May 2017 at Shirahatti Village, Shirahatti Taluk, Gadag District, for a period of twenty years. The licence was issued after environmental clearance.
In the year 2019, the respondent authorities issued Notification declaring Kappathgudda Reserve Forest at Kappathgudda as a Wildlife Sanctuary. It was sought to be stated by the petitioners that the eco-sensitive zone was not notified and that the Notification was issued without jurisdiction.
The respondents submitted that guidelines came to be published by the Union Ministry of Environment Forests on 6th May 2022. Paragraph 1.6 thereof was in respect of taking up any activity in the eco- sensitive zone, if notified or falling within 10 kilometres from the boundary of the National Parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries unless prior approval of National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) or of Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife (SCNBWL) was taken.
The bench noted that by communication dated 1st March 2024, the Government of Karnataka has notified six eco sensitive zones around the protected area. It then referred to Supreme Court judgment in the case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad Vs. Union of India and the High Court Division decision in Sri Sardar Ahmed H.A. Vs. State of Karnataka, Department of Commerce and Industries and others, which considered Rule 32 (1) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 prohibiting the mining activities within eco-sensitive zones or one kilometre from the boundary of the National Park and Sanctuary.
The court said “The issue of prohibiting to run and operate the quarries within one kilometre peripheral area from the boundary of the National Park or Sanctuary is no longer res integra and the Supreme Court has issued unequivocal directions banning the operations within the said periphery. Minimum one kilometre distance from the notified National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuary has to be maintained in establishing, running and operating the quarry units.”
Following which it held that the quarry leases of all the writ petitioners are situated within one kilometre from the boundary of Kappatgudda Wildlife Sanctuary and they could not have been permitted and their operations were liable to be suspended and stopped.
Appearance: Senior Advocate G.S. Kannur a/w Advocate P.M. Siddamallappa and Advocate K.Srikanth Patil for petitioners.
AGA S.S. Mahendra for respondents.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 280
Case Title: S R Bellary & State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NOS.25653/2022 C/W 25654/2022, 25655/2022, 25660/2022, 25680/2022, 12221/2023, 12229/2023, 17716/2023 AND 17912/2023