Illegal Sand Mining Serious, Needs to Be Curbed: SC
ECONOMY & POLICY

Illegal Sand Mining Serious, Needs to Be Curbed: SC

Terming illegal sand mining as a "serious" issue, the Supreme Court on Wednesday stated that such activities must be dealt with effectively and asked five states, including Tamil Nadu, Punjab, and Madhya Pradesh, to provide facts and figures on the matter. The court was hearing a 2018 public interest litigation (PIL) filed by M Alagarsamy, who sought a CBI investigation into illegal sand mining in rivers and beaches in Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh.

The petition alleged that unregulated illegal sand mining has caused "environmental havoc," with authorities allowing entities to operate without the necessary environmental plans and clearances. A bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar emphasized the need to address the issue, stating that illegal sand mining must be effectively tackled. The CJI noted that when advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioner, claimed that the states were not taking action and instead were covering up the issue, the bench sought clarity on whether environmental impact assessments (EIA) were required for sand mining activities. If so, it also sought information on the necessary prerequisites for such assessments.

The court directed the counsel representing the five states to come prepared with facts and figures for the next hearing, which is scheduled to take place in the week starting January 27, 2025. Senior advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, representing Tamil Nadu, assured the court that the state was taking effective steps to address the issue.

On July 16, the bench had directed Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh to file their responses to the PIL within six weeks, or face a fine of Rs 20,000. Justice Khanna remarked that while the Rs 20,000 fine might not be commensurate with the scale of illegal sand mining, it would encourage the states to file the required affidavits. Bhushan was assisted by advocate Pranav Sachdeva.

On January 24, 2019, the Supreme Court had issued notices to the Centre, CBI, and the five states, directing them to respond to the petition. The plea argued that due to the lack of implementation of guidelines by the states, several sand mining scams had occurred across the country. It claimed that citizens' right to life was being affected, as illegal sand mining was harming the environment and worsening the law and order situation.

The petition further requested that no environmental clearance should be granted for sand mining projects without a proper EIA, environmental management plan, and public consultation, as per the 2006 EIA notification. It also called for a ban on granting environmental clearance to sand mining projects without considering the cumulative impact in the area. Additionally, the plea demanded that those involved in illegal sand mining be prosecuted, their leases terminated, and a CBI investigation be initiated into the alleged scams.

Terming illegal sand mining as a serious issue, the Supreme Court on Wednesday stated that such activities must be dealt with effectively and asked five states, including Tamil Nadu, Punjab, and Madhya Pradesh, to provide facts and figures on the matter. The court was hearing a 2018 public interest litigation (PIL) filed by M Alagarsamy, who sought a CBI investigation into illegal sand mining in rivers and beaches in Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh. The petition alleged that unregulated illegal sand mining has caused environmental havoc, with authorities allowing entities to operate without the necessary environmental plans and clearances. A bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar emphasized the need to address the issue, stating that illegal sand mining must be effectively tackled. The CJI noted that when advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioner, claimed that the states were not taking action and instead were covering up the issue, the bench sought clarity on whether environmental impact assessments (EIA) were required for sand mining activities. If so, it also sought information on the necessary prerequisites for such assessments. The court directed the counsel representing the five states to come prepared with facts and figures for the next hearing, which is scheduled to take place in the week starting January 27, 2025. Senior advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, representing Tamil Nadu, assured the court that the state was taking effective steps to address the issue. On July 16, the bench had directed Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh to file their responses to the PIL within six weeks, or face a fine of Rs 20,000. Justice Khanna remarked that while the Rs 20,000 fine might not be commensurate with the scale of illegal sand mining, it would encourage the states to file the required affidavits. Bhushan was assisted by advocate Pranav Sachdeva. On January 24, 2019, the Supreme Court had issued notices to the Centre, CBI, and the five states, directing them to respond to the petition. The plea argued that due to the lack of implementation of guidelines by the states, several sand mining scams had occurred across the country. It claimed that citizens' right to life was being affected, as illegal sand mining was harming the environment and worsening the law and order situation. The petition further requested that no environmental clearance should be granted for sand mining projects without a proper EIA, environmental management plan, and public consultation, as per the 2006 EIA notification. It also called for a ban on granting environmental clearance to sand mining projects without considering the cumulative impact in the area. Additionally, the plea demanded that those involved in illegal sand mining be prosecuted, their leases terminated, and a CBI investigation be initiated into the alleged scams.

Next Story
Real Estate

Dharavi Rising

Dharavi, Asia’s largest informal settlement, stands on the cusp of a historic transformation. With an ambitious urban renewal project finally taking shape, millions of residents are looking ahead with hope. But delivering a project of this scale brings immense challenges – from land acquisition to rehabilitate ineligible residents outside Dharavi and rehabilitation to infrastructure development. It also requires balancing commercial goals with deep-rooted social impact. At the helm is SVR Srinivas, IAS, CEO & Officer on Special Duty, Dharavi Redevelopment Project (DRP), Government..

Next Story
Real Estate

MLDL Records 20.4% Growth in Pre-Sales

Mahindra Lifespace Developers Limited (MLDL), the real estate and infrastructure development arm of the Mahindra Group, announced its financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. In line with INDAS 115, the company recognises revenues using the completion of contract method. Key highlights FY25: Consolidated sales (Residential and IC&IC) of Rs 32.99 billion. Gross development value (GDV) additions in FY25 were Rs 1.81 trillion compared to Rs 440 billion in FY24 (~4x growth). Residential pre-sales of Rs 28.04 billion in FY25, reflecting 20.4% growth o..

Next Story
Infrastructure Transport

UCSL Delivers India's First Green Cargo Vessel to Norway

In a landmark achievement for Indian shipbuilding and the Atma Nirbhar Bharat initiative, Udupi Cochin Shipyard Limited (UCSL), a subsidiary of Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL), has delivered the first of six next-generation green cargo vessels to Norway-based Wilson Ship Management AS, Europe’s largest short-sea shipping operator. The 3,800 DWT vessel, named Wilson Eco 1, was handed over during a ceremony at New Mangalore Port. The delivery is part of a Rs 5.06 billion project supported by Norway’s green maritime funding programme, marking India's entry into the European eco-friendly ca..

Advertisement

Advertisement

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get daily newsletters around different themes from Construction world.

STAY CONNECTED

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Talk to us?