On Monday, February 12, 2024, the Madras High Court announced that it will start the final hearings on numerous cases concerning suspected illegal beach sand mining in Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli, and Kanniyakumari districts, as well as the statewide ban on mining since 2013, beginning March 11.
The Madras High Court has set a significant legal precedent by scheduling the final hearing on a series of pivotal cases concerning alleged illicit beach sand mining in the districts of Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli, and Kanniyakumari, alongside the comprehensive mining ban imposed across the state since 2013. This decision, made on Monday, February 12, 2024, by Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, marks a crucial juncture in the ongoing discourse surrounding environmental conservation and regulatory oversight in Tamil Nadu.
The bench arrived at this decision after extensive deliberations involving Senior Counsel Arvind P. Datar representing the State government, V. Raghavachari advocating for miner S. Vaikundarajan, amicus curiae V. Suresh, and Srinath Sridevan for V.V. Minerals. This diverse array of perspectives underscores the multifaceted nature of the legal and environmental issues at hand.
Central to the controversy are the Government Orders issued in 2013, which effectively halted beach sand mining operations, citing environmental concerns and regulatory violations. This blanket ban, while aimed at curbing illicit mining activities, has sparked a complex legal battle, challenging the balance between economic interests and environmental protection.
The initiation of a public interest litigation (PIL), originally filed by an individual but later transformed into a suo motu action by the court, highlights the broader public concern over the alleged illicit mining practices in these districts. The PIL seeks to address the ramifications of such activities on the local ecosystems and communities, emphasizing the need for stringent oversight and sustainable mining practices.
In an intriguing twist, the government had appointed senior Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer Gangandeep Singh Bedi to conduct a thorough assessment of the extent of illicit mining since the ban’s implementation. However, a single judge of the High Court set aside Mr. Bedi’s report due to procedural irregularities, prompting the State government to file a writ appeal against this decision. This appeal, as argued by Mr. Sridevan, must be prioritized before delving into the suo motu PIL, highlighting the legal intricacies surrounding the case.
Also Read- Allahabad High Court Notice On PIL Against Amendment UPHJS (lawchakra.in)
Amicus curiae V. Suresh’s submission of three comprehensive reports, based on independent studies and government data, has added another layer of complexity to the proceedings. These reports, accepted by both the Central and State governments, have played a pivotal role in shaping the legal narrative, despite being contested by representatives of the mining industry.
The issuance of show cause notices to miners, based on the findings of the amicus curiae, has prompted a mixed response from the implicated parties. While most miners have submitted their replies, some have requested additional time, and none have formally challenged the notices. This development reflects the ongoing dialogue between regulatory authorities and the mining sector, striving to reconcile economic activities with environmental stewardship.
As the Madras High Court prepares to embark on the final hearing from March 11, the legal community and the public await a resolution that balances the intricate demands of environmental conservation, regulatory compliance, and economic interests. This case not only represents a critical examination of beach sand mining practices in Tamil Nadu but also serves as a precedent for similar environmental and regulatory challenges across India.
