The Uttarakhand High Court recently sought counter-affidavits from respondents in a case challenging the validity of Sub-Rule (9) of Rule 31 of the Uttarakhand Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 2023.
The rule permits carrying on of mining operations by invoking the dredging policy for persons who have been issued a Letter of Intent for grant of mining lease but are unable to undertake mining operations due to lack of necessary clearances.
The petitioner contended that the state government had provided a backdoor entry to Letter of Intent holders who were unable to obtain necessary permissions from concerned agencies.
The petitioner argued that this provision allowed mining in all rivers within the state, even though necessary permissions had not been granted by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, and other concerned agencies.
The state counsel defended the provision, stating that it allowed only those persons who had been issued a Letter of Intent to undertake mining operations, and that they were required to pay twice the amount payable as royalty.
The counsel also argued that dredging was necessary to channelize rivers and prevent them from changing course or breaching their banks during heavy rains.
The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma directed the respondents to file counter-affidavits within four weeks and listed the matter for January 8, 2025.
In the meantime, the respondents were directed to ensure that in cases where mining was permitted by invoking Rule 31(9), JCB machines or excavators would not be used for removal of River Bed Material, and that the material would be removed only as per Sub-Rule (6) of Rule 50 of the Uttarakhand Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 2023.