Hasdeo Forest | Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Cancellation Of Mining Permission For PEKB, Parsa Coal Blocks In Chhattisgarh

The Supreme Court yesterday issued notice on a public interest litigation seeking a direction to the Union of India to cancel all non-forest use and mining permissions granted for PEKB (Parsa East and Kente Basan) and Parsa Coal Block, Chhattisgarh.

The PIL further seeks a direction to the State of Chhattisgarh to notify entire Hasdeo Aranya Forest (including, PEKB, Parsa, Tara, Kente Extension coal blocks) as Conservation Reserve under Section 36A of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order, on hearing Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared and argued for petitioner-Sudiep Shrivastava. The Court also called for response on an interim application filed by the petitioner seeking stay of any further project activities including tree felling at the Parsa Coal Block during the pendency of the case.

During the hearing, Bhushan submitted that 4 lakh trees are likely to be cut for mining in the subject forest, which is a notified corridor and a wildlife area. He contended that when the National Green Tribunal earlier quashed a forest clearance given for the subject mining, it asked the Environment Ministry to get the report of the Indian Council of Forest and Research Education (ICFRE) and WII (Wildlife Institute of India). Eventually, both the said reports were found to be damning, indicting mining in the area for multiple reasons. Yet, the Environment Ministry granted permission for forest diversion.

He referred to another petition raising similar issues, ie Dinesh Kumar Soni v. Union of India. It was explained that the same relates to the Coalgate case, where a three Judge bench headed by Chief Justice RM Lodha declared coal allocation between 1993-2009 illegal.

"in the main Coalgate case, the court quashed large number of mining leases which had been given to public sector corporations who had thereafter diverted those mining leases to private companies. This very RRVUNL was also quashed...thereafter, the same public sector corporation has been again given this lease, which was earlier quashed, and they have again diverted this to a private company, on the basis of the earlier agreement only! That's the subject matter of the DK Soni petition", Bhushan urged.

Dictating the order, Justice Kant said, "Vide an order dt. 28.04.2023, this matter was already listed alongwith CA No.4395/2014 and other connected matters. Learned counsels for the parties have handed over a copy of the order dt. 16.10.2023 passed by this Court in terms whereof CA No.4395/2014 along with SLP(C) No.18103/2022 already stands disposed of. Issue notice returnable on...the objection re maintainability shall remain open."

What does the petition say?

The petitioner, claiming to be a Chhattisgarh-based advocate and activist, has challenged (i) Environmental Clearance granted to project proponent-Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (RRVUNL) for PEKB Coal Block dated 10.08.2018, (ii) Chhattisgarh government's order dated 25.03.2022 granting permission of non-forest use and mining in Phase II Area Forest Land of 1136 Hect of PEKB, and (iii) Environment Ministry order dated 02.02.2022 allowing RRVUNL and MDO PKCL to mine in Phase II Area of the PEKB Block.

It is stated that pursuant to an appeal filed by him, forest clearance granted to the PEKB Coal Block and Minister's order dated 23.06.2011 were quashed by the NGT on 24.03.2014. The NGT order was challenged by RRVUNL before the Supreme Court.

The petitioner asserts that due to the pendency of RRVUNL's appeal before the Supreme Court, the NGT did not hear the appeals filed by him against subsequent clearances granted to PEKB, and other coal blocks, and adjourned them sine die. As such, he filed applications in RRVUNL's appeal before the Supreme Court, challenging the permissions granted to use Phase II of the PEKB land. The appeal has since been disposed of.

Statedly, in December, 2022, the NGT also dismissed the petitioner's appeals challenging environmental clearance granted to PEKB and Parsa Coal Block, which were earlier adjourned sine-die, without hearing them on merit.

Another petition (Dinesh Kumar Soni v. Union of India) challenges environmental clearance dated 21.12.2011 granted to the PEKB coal block, which was not interfered with by the NGT on the ground of limitation, without deciding issues on merit.

As per the petitioner, the coal blocks were initially categorized as "NOGO" where mining permission could not have been granted. Thereafter, the GO-NOGO classification was substituted by Violate-Inviolate. Be that as it may, the impugned coal blocks were so rich in biodiversity that they were classified as "Inviolate" [for context, the National Mining Policy 2019 does not allow mining in dense forested areas classified as "NOGO" or "Inviolate"].

The WII and ICFRE gave reports recommending that there should not be any mining in the Hasdeo Area beyond the area already broken in the PEKB block, and that the Hasdeo Aranya be treated as Bio Conservation Area (however, casting exception for 4 blocks viz. PEKB, Parsa, Tara and Kete Extension). Yet, except Tara, all other blocks were allotted to RRVUNL which transferred them for mining to Gautam Adani owned private companies.

Case Title: SUDIEP SHRIVASTAVA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 510/2023