The Madras High Court today upheld a single judge order directing authorities to stop sand mining in Tamil Nadu within six months.
On November 29 last year, Justice R Mahadevan had directed the Tamil Nadu government to stop all sand mining and quarrying activities in the state within six months and not to open any new sand quarries.
Dismissing appeals filed by Collectors of Tuticorin, Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari districts, a division bench comprising Justices K Kalyanasundaram and T Krishnavalli directed authorities to strictly comply with the single judge's order.
The bench said the ban on sand mining would continue.
Justice Mahadevan in his order had said that sand had been quarried beyond permitted level affecting the flow of water in rivers and impacting agriculture in the state.
Besides ground water level had also dipped in several places due to mining of sand, he had said.
The order was passed on a petition of M R M Ramaiya, a trader seeking a direction to the state to permit him to sell the river sand he had imported from Malaysia and stored at the Tuticorin port.
The single judge had ordered that quarries of granites and other minerals, except gravel, be periodically closed to maintain ecological balance.
The petitioner had submitted that he had imported one lakh tonnes of sand from Malaysia and sold 96 tonnes to a customer in Marthandam in Kanyakumari district.
The Kanyakumari collector, however, had seized the lorries carrying the imported sand.
The writ appeals were filed by the state government against the single judge order stating that the state has powers to control storage and transportation of imported sand.
Also imported sand was 'silica sand.' While this could not be used for construction purposes, it could be used for industrial purposes, the government submitted.
Advocate General Vijay Narayan contended that the direction of the single judge was in the nature of legislating laws, amounting to transgression into the legislature's powers.
He also contended that the refusal of the single judge in coming to the issue as to whether the imported sand was fit for construction purpose or not, would itself vitiate the order.
Stating that sand was sold online by the government, he said since the power of the government to quarry was approved by the Supreme Court, the order of the single judge was against the dictum laid down by the top court.
Further, the courts have been emphasising balance between development and environmental protection and the ban on mining river sand was unwarranted.
Rejecting the arguments, the bench, in its order, quoting a report of an assistant professor in architecture, said the most common constituent of sand was silica.
The river sand also will contain silica. Further, in all import documents it was clearly mentioned that the sand imported was river sand for construction purpose.
Also, the Karnataka government has already imported river sand from Malaysia to curb illegal mining and there were many skyscrapers in Malaysia as well.
Hence, the contention that the imported sand from Malaysia was not fit for construction activities is rejected, the bench said.
Observing that Tamil Nadu has been unsuccessful in curbing illegal sand mining, the court said the directions of the single judge were not legislative in scope.
The directions were only issued for non-compliance of statutory provisions and for failure to safeguard environment and the ecology, which was a duty enshrined on the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it said.
"Further, when there was an alternate sand source permissible in law, this court is of the view that the directions cannot be termed as beyond the scope of the writ petition," the bench held.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
