Hasdeo Forest | Supreme Court issues notice on plea seeking cancellation of mining permit for PEKB and Parsa coal blocks in Chhattisgarh

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

The PIL further asks the State of Chhattisgarh to declare the entire Hasdeo Aranya forest (including the PEKB, Parsa, Tara and Kente Extension coal blocks) as a wildlife sanctuary under Section 36A of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

A bench of Judges Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan gave the order, after hearing Lawyer Prashant Bhushanwho appeared and argued for the petitioner-Sudiep Shrivastava. The Court also called for a response to an interim request by the petitioner for suspension of further project activities, including felling of trees in the Parsa Coal Block, during the pendency of the case.

During the hearing, Bhushan stated that four lakh trees are likely to be felled for mining in the forest in question, which is a notified corridor and a nature reserve. He claimed that when the National Green Tribunal earlier quashed a forest clearance on the subject of mining, it had asked the Environment Ministry for the report of the Indian Council of Forest and Research Education (ICFRE) and WII (Wildlife Institute of India). Ultimately, both reports proved to be damning, with mining in the area being indicted on multiple grounds. Nevertheless, the Ministry of the Environment has given permission for the diversion of forests.

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

“In the Coalgate case, the court quashed a large number of mining contracts awarded to public sector companies, which had then diverted these mining contracts to private companies. This RRVUNL was also quashed… thereafter the same public sector company was quashed .” re-obtained this lease, which was previously voided, and they re-assigned it to a private company solely based on the prior agreement! Bhushan insisted.

Judge Kant dictated the order, saying: “Vide an order dated 28.04.2023, this case was already listed along with CA No. 4395/2014 and other related cases. The lawyers of the parties have submitted a copy of the order dated 16.10.2023 passed by this court in terms of which CA No. 4395/2014 along with SLP(C) No. 18103/2022 has already been disposed of.

What does the petition say?

The petitioner, who claims to be a lawyer and activist from Chhattisgarh, has challenged (i) the environmental clearance granted to project proponent Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (RRVUNL) for PEKB Coal Block dated August 10, 2018, and (ii) the order of Government of Chhattisgarh dated 25.03.2022 granting permission for non-forest use and mining in Phase II area Forest land of 1136 Hect of PEKB, and (iii) order of Ministry of Environment dated 02.02.2022 allowing RRVUNL and MDO PKCL allowed to operate mines in Phase II area of ​​the PEKB Block.

It is stated that on the basis of an appeal filed by him, the forest clearance granted to the PEKB Coal Block and the Minister’s decision dated June 23, 2011 were quashed by the NGT on March 24, 2014. The NGT order was challenged by RRVUNL in the Supreme Court.

The petitioner claims that due to the pendency of RRVUNL’s appeal in the Supreme Court, the NGT has not heard the appeals filed by him against subsequent approvals to PEKB and other coal blocks and has postponed them forever. As such, he has filed applications in RRVUNL’s appeal to the Supreme Court, challenging the permission granted for the use of Phase II of the PEKB land. The appeal has now been settled.

In December 2022, the NGT also dismissed the petitioner’s appeals against the environmental clearance granted to PEKB and Parsa Coal Block, which had earlier been permanently postponed, without hearing them on merits.

Another petition (Dinesh Kumar Soni v Union of India) challenges the environmental clearance dated 21.12.2011 granted to the PEKB coal block, in which the NGT has not interfered on the grounds of restrictions, without deciding any issues on merits.

According to the petitioner, the coal blocks were initially categorized as “NOGO”, for which no mining permit could be granted. Afterwards, the GO-NOGO classification was replaced by Violate-Inviolate. Be that as it may, the disputed coal blocks were so rich in biodiversity that they were classified as “Inviolable” (for context, the National Mining Policy 2019 does not allow mining in densely forested areas classified as “NOGO” or “Inviolable”).

The WII and ICFRE have issued reports recommending that no mining should take place in the Hasdeo area outside the area already broken up into the PEKB block, and that the Hasdeo Aranya should be treated as a bioprotection area (however, an exception is made made for 4 blocks, namely PEKB). , Parsa, Tara and Kete extension). But except Tara, all other blocks were allotted to RRVUNL, which handed them over to private companies owned by Gautam Adani for mining.

Case Title: SUDIEP SHRIVASTAVA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., WP(C) No. 510/2023