Supreme Court Issues Directions For Protection Of Chittorgarh Fort, Prohibits Blasting Activities Within 5 Kms Radius

“…keeping in perspective the continuous exposure of ancient monuments to peak particle velocity (PPV) arising from blasting, a radius of five kilometres from the compound wall of the Fort shall not be subjected to mining by blasting or use of explosives for mining of any minerals”, the Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti ordered.

As per the order, manual/mechanical mining operations are still permissible within the 5 kms radius, subject to a lessee possessing valid lease under law.

The Bench further directed constitution of an Expert Committee within 2 weeks, to undertake study of environmental pollution and impact on the Fort of blasting operations beyond the 5 kms radius. This Committee, to be constituted by Chairman, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, Jharkhand, shall constitute a team of multi-disciplinary experts.

Background

The issue came to fore in the backdrop of the Rajasthan government granting mining leases for areas in and around the Chittorgarh Fort, which are rich in limestone. The extraction of minerals using explosives/blasting operations led to concerns about the Fort's continuous exposure to peak particle velocity (PPV) generated in the process of blasting.

Certain residents of Chittorgarh moved the Rajasthan High Court to stop blasting activities within a 10 kms radius of the Fort. The order of the High Court granted relief, prohibiting mining and blasting activities within 10 kms of the Fort wall. In view of the polluter pays principle, it further directed the mine holders, including petitioner/Birla Corporation, to pay compensation of INR 5 crores for restoration of the Fort (of which 90 percent was to be paid by Birla Corporation).

Aggrieved, Birla Corporation, which possessed a mining lease for 598.98 hectares (at a distance of about 4.5 kms from the boundary of the Fort), approached the Supreme Court. While issuing notice, the court observed that the question of complete ban on mining operations around the Fort, even without involvement of blasting, was not before the High Court.

Accordingly, Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee (CBRI, Roorkee) was directed to undertake a comprehensive study of the environmental impact on the Fort due to mining and blasting activities within a 10 kms radius. The CBRI, Roorkee gave a Report, stating that the vibration and air overpressure induced by blasting in mines of Birla Corporation could be concluded to be absolutely safe as per national and international standards.

Observations of the Court

On perusing the CBRI, Roorkee's report and after hearing submissions of the parties, the Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti opined,

“The issue is undoubtedly of grave concern, and the conflict between the exploitation of mineral wealth and sustaining the neighbourhood, stated pithily, adheres to the principle of sustainable exploitation of mineral resources without adversely affecting the community interest in any manner.”

It was of the considered view that CBRI, Roorkee's report was not in line with another report placed on record by the Ministry of Coal and Mines, Indian Bureau of Mines, Mining Research Cell.

Despite reports suggesting that blasting operations can be undertaken beyond the safe distance ought not to be given effect unless examined in a detailed study undertaken by exploring the latest techniques and technologies, the court said.

“The scientific/technological advancements can only be ignored if their efficacy as wanting is established in a study undertaken by a committee constituted by this Court…By choice, we prefer a third-party institution and experts in this branch of engineering/science to undertake the study independently”.

Notably, as per the report of CBRI, Roorkee, other factors, such as money menace, human/tourist footfall, unwanted vegetation growth, and the defacing of statues were also contributing to deterioration of the Fort.

Accordingly, with regard to unauthorized littering in the Fort area, as well as monkey menace, the Bench issued directions to the Rajasthan government and the State Pollution Control Board for strict implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and taking of necessary steps.

“…prevention of damage from any such collateral activities must be simultaneously addressed by the State Government of Rajasthan and the ASI”, the court held.

It was also opined that the approach to preserve the Fort must be multi-dimensional.

“With the passage of every year, the need to preserve monuments increases…the Chittorgarh Fort, a heritage monument, must be maintained and preserved under all the circumstances”.

Before parting, the Bench authorized the Rajasthan government and State Pollution Control Board to direct stopping of blasting operations if the study to be undertaken results in unexpected damage to Fort structures without waiting for court orders. The expenses of the study were ordered to be borne by Birla Corporation.

Appearance: Senior Advocates Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Madhavi Divan, Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Dr. Manish Singhvi, Jayant Mehta and Adn Rao; AOR Ajay Kumar Singh

Case Title: Birla Corporation Limited through its Managing Director v. Bhanwar Singh and Others, S.L.P.(C) No. 21211 of 2012 (and connected matters)

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 38