Proposals For Provision Of Compensatory Rest For Consultants On 1: Fill & Download for Free

TARUN BHARAT SANGH, a non-governmental organization (NGO) concerned with environmental issues in Alwar district filed a PIL in 1991 for banning Mining in Sariska Tiger Reserve. (Tarun Bharat Sangh Alwar Vs Union of India and Others on 8 April 1993 in the Supreme Court; 1993 SCR (3) 21, 1993 SCC Supl. (3) 115)In an order dated October 11, 1991, the court had ruled that "no mining operation of any nature shall be carried on in the protected SARISKA TIGER RESERVE area (STR)". But that order has yet to be implemented, thwarted mainly by a powerful miner-bureaucrat-politician nexus.ON OCTOBER 11, 1991, the Supreme Court appointed a five-member committee, headed by retired Rajasthan high court judge M L Jain, to determine the boundaries of the areas in Sariska Tiger Reserve (STR) notified under various acts as protected forests and Tiger Project Reserve. The committee also was required to assess the environmental impact of mining and recommend remedial measures for land restoration.The Committee shall consist of the following members:(1) Mr. Justice M.L. Jain, former Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi,(2) The Chief Conservator of Forest and Wild Life Warden, Government of Rajasthan(3) Additional Director of Mines, Udaipur;(4) Collector, Alwar District, and(5) Dr. Anil Agrawal of the center for Science and Environment, New Delhi.The Chairman of the Committee shall convene, preside over and conduct the meetings and deliberations of the Committee.The committee had submitted its report on September 28, 1992.Supreme Court decided on 8 April, 1993, in Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar vs Union of India and Others on 8 April, 1993 in the Supreme Court, The least the court could deliver was,“It is directed that the mining activity in the mines situated outside the protected forest areas but within the tiger reserve may continue for a period of four months.”_______________________________Forest Survey of India (FSI) under the Project Tiger Directorate (2004) found that, during 1997–2002 (only in five years), overall forest cover in all the existing 28 Tiger Reserves (TR) of the country decreased by 0.31%, of which 0.21% occurred during 1997–2000 and the rest of 0.10% occurred during 2000–2002.Only five TRs (Tiger Reserves) in the country recorded an increase in forest cover during the same period. Field surveys carried out by the authors, reveals a significant decrease in forest cover and density of the SARISKA TIGER RESERVE (STR) over the years and that can be easily verified if the available satellite pictures of 2011 are compared with the topography sheets of 1970’s. Further, there has been a significant change in biodiversity in the park, which has been a major attraction for large number of tourists. Forest cover in the outer surround of Tiger Reserves in India shows a decrease of 0.48 % (by 124 Sq km) during 1997 to 2002, of which 0.28% occurred during 1997 to 2000, and the remaining decline of 0.20% occurred during 2000 to 2002. The Outer Surround of STR also recorded a decrease of about 1% during 1997 to 2002. Overall degradation of the forest cover in the outer surrounds exceeded that of the tiger reserves in the country. It provides a warning for the protection of the core reserves from the threat of more encroachment and degradation.Only 14 sq km of very dense forest has been ascertained in Sariska (Forest Survey of India Report, 2003). Total area of STR is however 866 sq km including 492 sq km of the notified Sariska Wildlife Sanctuary and 374 sq km of adjoining area of Alwar, Rajgarh and Sariska Forest Ranges (Figure 1). The forest of STR falls under group V and VI of Champion and Seth (1968) classification of Tropical Dry Deciduous and Tropical Thorn. Total Reserve Forest area in the sanctuary is 39,705 hectares. While protected forest area in the sanctuary is 9,494.54 hectares. Nestled in the world’s oldest mountain ranges, STR, with its repository of dense forest, wide valley and sprawling plateaus, has drawn attention worldwide for the loss of its flagship species and biodiversity, which is one of the prominent examples of human-wildlife conflict under the broad umbrella of economy-environment relationship and development-environment trade-off (Chauhan, 2014) U.K. De and K. Chauhan__________________________________________LEGALITY OF MINING LEASES IN THE PROTECTED SARISKA TIGER RESERVE (STR) IN RAJASTHANThe Rajasthan department of mines and geology had leased in 1987 land to some mine-owners who had obtained no-objection certificates (NOCs) from then field director T Saini. The mining department issued more leases the following year, but without consulting the field director. Saini's successor, Fateh Singh, has testified that Saini issued NOCs even though he was aware of the STR boundaries. Confirming this, assistant field director L P Sharma says, "Certain areas were designated as protected forest areas after the 1975 notification, but mining was allowed by the then field director. There could have been a mistake in allowing mines to operate. (However) if we have made a mistake in appropriating the land, the authorities should persecute us, and not harm the forest."Project Tiger director A Ghosh says he had no prior knowledge of Saini granting NOCs and "it is an embarrassment for us". But he declined to comment on how a Project Tiger official could take such action without his consent. And, a law ministry source clarifies that a field director is not empowered to issue NOCs to applications for mining leases in protected areas.Mine-owners, however, cite the NOCs as proof of legality and contend their leases are in areas demarcated under what they consider to be an interim notification issued in 1975. But the court has thrown out this argument. The mine-owners also say the forest department maps, submitted to the court to demarcate protected areas, are not authentic. But the court forest department map is similar to one made by Project Tiger authorities.The court's judgement is unequivocal in ordering the closure of some mines, despite whatever the mine-owners choose to believe. The issue is not so much where these mines are, as whether they were legally sanctioned.The mines around Sariska yield marble, dolomite and limestone. Central government clearance is required for the mining of all three minerals but they were never obtained before the granting of leases for any of the mines, thus making them illegal. Furthermore, all mine-owners are required to submit an environmental management plan, but none has done so.Mine-workers near Tilwadi, a village on the boundary of the reserve, are aware their quarrying is illegal. But, says Shyam Yadav, a mine-foreman, "We are dependent upon it for our livelihood. Of late, the pace of mining has increased. Once mining is stopped, we will be forced to return to our villages in Bihar."Numerous studies have listed mining's adverse effects on STR's ecology, especially the falling water table and high dust levels. The overburden, or mining waste, is dumped on surrounding land, rendering it infertile. Mining, adds Sharma, has also adversely affected the fauna of the region, with the number of tigers in the reserve falling from about 45 in 1985 to 22 in 1991, though this may also be due to poaching.Bureaucratic ineptness and political greed are also blamed for STR's sorry state. Though protection against mining is more than adequate on paper, the sheer apathy of state officials in enforcing the law has allowed mining to flourish. In the 18 months since the Supreme Court's first order prohibiting all mining, mine-owners have had a field day. It remains to be seen if the state government, which has refrained from acting so far, will enforce the court's orders now, especially in the face of the enormous clout that mine-owners have with the Central and state governments.The latest order dated April 8, 2015 of the Supreme Court was issued in A PUBLIC INTEREST CASE filed in 1991 by TARUN BHARAT SANGH, a non-governmental organization (NGO) concerned with environmental issues in Alwar district.In an earlier order dated October 11, 1991, the court had ruled that "no mining operation of any nature shall be carried on in the protected SARISKA TIGER RESERVE area (STR)". But that order has yet to be implemented, thwarted mainly by a powerful miner-bureaucrat-politician nexus.Despite ban, mines thrive in Sariska reserve a PROTECTED forest with unclear boundaries, a tiger reserve chalked out in a limestone-rich area, mining leases whose legality is questionable -- all these have created a mess in THE PROTECTED SARISKA TIGER RESERVE (STR) in Rajasthan, resulting in Court having to intervene once again.Despite ban, mines thrive in Sariska reserve, a Supreme Court order demanding immediate closure of about 250 mines in and around the Sariska Tiger Reserve has evoked little response from the Rajasthan government.On April 8, 2015 the Supreme Court accepted the recommendations of a committee, headed by Rajasthan high court judge M L Jain, that it had appointed to look into the issue. But, the state administration has shown no willingness so far to implement the recommendations.The order is broadly in three sections.The first immediately shuts down 215 mines located entirely within Sariska's protected forest area and 47 mines that are partly within it. There are more than 500 mines in the Sariska area.The second directs the ministry of environment and forests (MEF) to forward within three months a report on the Rajasthan government's proposal to transfer 5.02 sq km land to STR, in lieu of an equal area where mining is going on. This would mean not only denotifying 5.02 sq km of land, but also afforesting the compensatory land to be transferred to STR.The third part requires owners of mines outside the protected forest areas but within STR, to obtain within four months, MEF permission to operate. This portion of the ruling affects about 250 mines, but they can all continue to operate for four months.The Supreme Court notes it has accepted the report of the M L Jain committee to "ensure the observance of the various acts and notifications issued thereunder with respect to the protected areas (in STR)." It has ignored, however, the committee's recommendation to conduct a detailed assessment of the environmental impact of mining in STR. The committee had submitted its report on September 28, 1992._____________________________ON OCTOBER 11, 1991, the Supreme Court appointed a five-member committee, headed by retired Rajasthan high court judge M L Jain, to determine the boundaries of the areas in Sariska Tiger Reserve (STR) notified under various acts as protected forests and Tiger Project Reserve. The committee also was required to assess the environmental impact of mining and recommend remedial measures for land restoration.The committee verified the demarcation of the protected forest areas by matching forest department maps with those of the revenue department. It found the protected forest area, as delineated in the forest department's map, almost matching the area covered by the notifications of January 1975 and 1986. Wherever there was a discrepancy between the maps and the notifications, the committee upheld the forest department's boundaries. The committee then identified 215 mines that were completely within the protected area and 47 mines that were partly within and recommended their immediate closure.In a dissenting note, a committee member with a keen interest in environmental issues, suggested the preparation of a detailed environmental impact assessment of mining on the reserve, pointing out that the environmental impact of a mine could not be determined by simply noting on which side of the fence it is located. He criticised the committee for its inordinately lengthy deliberations on the demarcation issue and its lack of attention to the legality of the mines.Three other committee members -- the collector of Alwar district, the state's chief conservator of forests who is also its chief wildlife warden and the additional director of mines and geology -- recommended the Centre should accept the state government's offer of transferring land, with provision for its afforestation, in lieu of the area occupied by mines. They said this would balance the interests of the mine-owners, the mine-workers and the Sariska reserve.In its assessment of environmental impact, the committee declared open cast mining was causing land degradation, polluting ground and surface water, polluting the atmosphere and causing pulmonary and other health problems among the mine-workers, disturbing the animals in the sanctuary, reducing agricultural productivity and degrading pasture lands.