legislative weaknesses in stone quarrying crushing in uttar pradesh

ngt imposes over rs 1.17 cr penalty on 21 stone crushers in ap for causing pollution

It warned that if the amount is not paid, then the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) is directed to take appropriate steps to realise the amount with the aid of concerned District Collector by initiating necessary proceedings in accordance with law.

The bench also asked the APPCB to make periodical inspection of these crusher units and if any violation is found or there is non-compliance of recommendations, 'then the Board is directed to take appropriate action against the erring units, apart from issuing closure direction, assess environmental compensation and recover the amount from them on the basis of the guidelines provided by the Central Pollution Control Board in this regard.

The APPCB is further directed to submit a status of recovery of compensation directed to be paid by each unit periodically once in four months and if such reports are filed, the office is directed to place them before this Bench, it said.

The tribunal's judgement came on a plea filed by farmer K Hiroji Rao regarding the operation of the stone crusher units and the pollution caused in adjoining village of Nemakal, Untekal in Bommanahal Mandal, Ananthpur District of Andhra Pradesh.

The NGT said these 21 crusher units enumerated in the report by a committee formed by it have caused damage and committed violation and they are liable to pay compensation for the violation committed and also the damage caused to the environment on account of their operations.

The green panel also said the compensation in respect of persons affected cannot be considered in this application, as they were not before this Tribunal and there is no data available regarding the nature of damage caused to each individual. PTI PKS SA

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman shared photos of Smriti Irani, Darshana Jardosh, Pratima Bhoumik, Shobha Karandlaje, Bharati Pravin Pawar, Meenakshi Lekhi, Anupriya Patel and Annapurna Devi on Twitter.

Veteran diplomat Hardeep Singh Puri became India's new oil minister on Thursday, an appointment welcomed by energy experts who expect him to strike better import deals and showcase New Delhi as an attractive destination for investment in the sector. Puri's appointment comes amid public anger over record-high fuel prices in India, which is now the world's third largest importer and consumer of oil and is seeking to strike better bargains with producers. His past experience as India's permanent representative to the United Nations will serve Puri well in his new role, diplomats and sector experts said.

In the Cabinet reshuffle on Wednesday (7 July), seven more women have found a place in Narendra Modi's Council of Ministers, taking the total number to eleven. Among them, while Shobha Karandlaje is inducted as minister of state in the Ministry of agriculture and farmers welfare, Meenakshi Lekhi is made minister of state in both Ministry of external affairs and Ministry of culture. Shobha Karandlaje is a Lok Sabha MP (BJP) for Udupi, Chikmagalur in Karnataka, serving her second term as MP.

Lucknow (Delhi) [India], July 9 (ANI): The health condition of former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh, who is admitted in the intensive care unit (ICU) of the Sanjay Gandhi Post-graduate Institute of Medical Sciences in Lucknow, is better and he is hemodynamically stable.

Kabul [Afghanistan] July 8 (ANI): The Afghanistan forces have regained control of Qala-e-naw city of Western Badghis province in just a few hours after losing it to the hands of the Taliban, informed the country's Defence Ministry on Wednesday.

Mumbai, Jul 8 (PTI) The NCP on Thursday came out in support of its leader Eknath Khadse, who is facing an inquiry by the ED in connection with a Pune land deal case, with the party saying that although he was innocent, the BJP, which is in power at the Centre, was wrongfully targeting him.

Mumbai, Jul 9 (PTI) The Shiv Sena on Friday alleged that the inclusion of BJPs Rajya Sabha member Bhagwat Karad into the Union council of ministers, instead of late leader Gopinath Mundes daughter and two-time MP Pritam Munde, was a plan to finish off the political career of her sister Pankaja Munde, a former Maharashtra minister.

Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], July 9 (ANI): Maharashtra government-appointed inquiry commission will record the statement of Nationalist Congress Party chief Sharad Pawar in the Bhima Koregaon violence case.

Foreign tourists who are not vaccinated against COVID-19 will not be allowed to enter Canada for quite some time because the government is unwilling to jeopardize progress made on containing the virus, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Thursday. "I can tell you right now that's not going to happen for quite a while," said Trudeau, when asked by reporters when Canada would allow unvaccinated tourists to enter the country. Canada, as of this week, has waived quarantine requirements for fully vaccinated citizens.

Lucknow, Jul 8 (PTI) BJP national president J P Nadda on Thursday visited Sanjay Gandhi Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences here to meet former Uttar Pradesh CM Kalyan Singh, who is getting treatment at the hospital.

The lead scientist on China's Sinovac vaccine trials in Indonesia died of suspected Covid-19 on Wednesday, Indonesian media announced. Kumparan news service said Novilia Sjafri Bachtiar had died of the coronavirus.

rural litigation & entitlement kendra vs. state of u.p [1988] insc254 (30 august 1988)

A letter-petition, and an application, containing allegations of unauthorised and illegal mining in the Mussoorie-Dehradun belt, affecting adversely the ecology and environmental order of the area, were directed to be registrered as writ petitions under public interest litigation. Apart from the Governments of the Union and of Uttar Pradesh, several governmental agencies and mining lessees appeared in the proceedings. A number of committees and working groups were set up both by the Court and the Central Government to look into the various aspects of the problem, their reports received and several comprehensive interlocutory directions issued.

One of the Committees, referred to as the Bhargava Committee, classified the mines into three groups, being A, B, C. On the basis of the recommendations of the Bhargava Committee Report and other material the Court directed, by its order dated 12th March, 1985, that category mines of the Bhargava Committee Report should be closed down permanently. Similar order was made in regard to category mines situated in the shasradhara block. The Court further directed category mines located within the Mussoorie municipal limits and the remaining B category mines to submit their mining scheme for scrutiny of the Bandyopadhyay Committee. The Court, however, allowed category mines located outside the city limits to operate.

These mines, however, continued to operate under the orders of various courts which had granted extension of their leases pending the final orders of the courts. This Court, in its order dated 12th March, 1985 had therefore, directed that if any mining lessee of a mine, which had been ordered to be closed down, was running under the first grant or under Court's orders after its expiry, it would not be entitled to take advantage of that position.

In its order dated 16th December, 1986 this Court recognised the need to strike a balance between preservation and utilisation of deposits, and urged the Government to take a policy decision in the matter. The Government thereupon set up another committee to examine the working of the limestone mining operations in the Doon valley. This Committee inspected six mines which were operating. Three of these mines were operating under valid mining leases and the other three, whose leases had expired in December 1982? were operating under orders of different courts.

(1) decision of this Court dated 12th March, 1985 was final in certain aspects including the release of the A category mines outside the city limits from the proceedings, and in view of such finality it is not open to this Court in the same proceedings at a later stage to direct differently in regard to what has been decided earlier;

(2) during the pendency of these writ petitions, the Environment Protection Act of l986 has come into force and since that Statute and the Rules made thereunder provide detailed procedure to deal with the situations that arise in these cases, this Could should no more deal with the matter and leave it to be looked into by the authorities under the Act, and

Constitution of India, 1950: Article 32 Limestone quarries- Dehradun Mussoorie belt-Public interest litigation against pollution- High Powered Committee to be set up to look after re-afforestation, mining activities and bring about natural normalcy in the Doon Valley.

A letter-petition, and an application, containing allegations of unauthorised and illegal mining in the Mussoorie-Dehradun belt, affecting adversely the ecology and environmental order of the area, were directed to be registrered as writ petitions under public interest litigation. Apart from the Governments of the Union and of Uttar Pradesh, several governmental agencies and mining lessees appeared in the proceedings. A number of committees and working groups were set up both by the Court and the Central Government to look into the various aspects of the problem, their reports received and several comprehensive interlocutory directions issued.

One of the Committees, referred to as the Bhargava Committee, classified the mines into three groups, being A, B, C. On the basis of the recommendations of the Bhargava Committee Report and other material the Court directed, by its order dated 12th March, 1985, that category mines of the Bhargava Committee Report should be closed down permanently. Similar order was made in regard to category mines situated in the shasradhara block. The Court further directed category mines located within the Mussoorie municipal limits and the remaining B category mines to submit their mining scheme for scrutiny of the Bandyopadhyay Committee. The Court, however, allowed category mines located outside the city limits to operate.

These mines, however, continued to operate under the orders of various courts which had granted extension of their leases pending the final orders of the courts. This Court, in its order dated 12th March, 1985 had therefore, directed that if any mining lessee of a mine, which had been ordered to be closed down, was running under the first grant or under Court's orders after its expiry, it would not be entitled to take advantage of that position.

In its order dated 16th December, 1986 this Court recognised the need to strike a balance between preservation and utilisation of deposits, and urged the Government to take a policy decision in the matter. The Government thereupon set up another committee to examine the working of the limestone mining operations in the Doon valley. This Committee inspected six mines which were operating. Three of these mines were operating under valid mining leases and the other three, whose leases had expired in December 1982? were operating under orders of different courts.

(1) decision of this Court dated 12th March, 1985 was final in certain aspects including the release of the A category mines outside the city limits from the proceedings, and in view of such finality it is not open to this Court in the same proceedings at a later stage to direct differently in regard to what has been decided earlier;

(2) during the pendency of these writ petitions, the Environment Protection Act of l986 has come into force and since that Statute and the Rules made thereunder provide detailed procedure to deal with the situations that arise in these cases, this Could should no more deal with the matter and leave it to be looked into by the authorities under the Act, and

HELD: (1) "Forest" was initially a State subject covered by Entry 19 in List II of the Seventh Schedule. In 1976, under the 42nd Amendment the Entry was deleted and Entry 17- A in the concurrent List was lnserted. The change from the State List to the Concurrent List was brought about PG NO 692 following the realisation of the Central Government that `forests' were of national importance and should be placed in the Concurrent List to enable the Central Government to deal with the matter. The same amendment of the Constitution brought in Article 48,A and Article 51A(g) is Part IVA. [713H; 714A-B]

(2) The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 does not permit mining in the forest area. If mining activity even to a limited extent is permitted in future, it would be not congenial to ecology and environment, and the natural calm and peace which is a special feature of this area in its normal condition shall not be restored. This tourist zone in its natural setting would certainly be at its best if its serenity is restored in the fullest way. [7l0E-F]

(3) By the Court's order of 12th March, l985, the A category mining leases outside the city limits were only exempted from further scrutiny and not released from the proceedings. If the court really intended to release the A category mines outside the city limits, it could very well pronounce that in clear terms. [706E-H]

(4) The examination by this Court when it made the order of 12th March, 1985, omitted to consider the impact of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 which was then a statute in force. If the provision of the Conservation Act had been noticed and impact thereof for the continuance of mining activity bad been considered, perhaps the Court would have made no exemptions and no mining may have been permitted. [706G]

(5) The writ petitions are not inter-party disputes and have been raised by way of public interest litigation, and the controversy before the Court is as to whether for safety and for creating a hazardless environment for the people to live in, mining in the area should be permitted or stopped.

The Court may not be taken to have said that for public interest litigations, procedural laws do not apply. At the same time, it has to be remembered that every technicality in the procedural law is not available as a defence when a matter of grave public importance is for consideration before the Court. Even if it is said that there was a final order, in a dispute of this type it would be difficult to entertain the plea of res judicata. Leaving the question open for examination in future would lead to unnecessary multiplicity of proceedings and would be against the interest of society. [707B-D]

(6) These writ petitions were filed more than three years before the Environment (Protection) Act, l986 came PG NO 693 into force. This Court appointed several expert commitees, received their reports and made directions. The several parties and their counsel have been heard for days together on different issues during the three and a quarter years of the pendency of the proceedings. The Environment (Protection) Act does does purport to- and perhaps could not--take away the jurisdiction of this Court to deal with a case of this type. In consideration of these facts, there is no justification to decline the exercise of jurisdiction at this stage. [707E-G]

(7) Ordinarily, the Court would not entertain a dispute for the adjudication of which a special provision has been made by law but that rule is not attracted in the present situation in these cases. Besides it is a rule of practice and prudence and not one of jurisdiction. [707H]

(8) The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 applies to renewals as well and even if there was a provision for renewal in the lease agreement on exercise of Lessee's option,the requirements of l980 Act had to be satisfied before such renewal could be granted. [717G-H] Ambica Quarry Works v. State of Gujarat & Ors., [1987] 1 SCC 213; State of Rajasthan v. Hari Shankar Rajindra Pal, [l965l 3 SCR 402 and State of Bihar v. Banshi Ram Modi, [l985] 3 SCC 643, referred to.

(9) It is clear from the directions contained in the order of 12th March, 1985, as also the ratio of the judgment in the Ambica Quarry Works case, that even if there has been an order of the Court and no challenge is raised against such order, this Court could invoke its jurisdiction to nullify the direction or order, and if any order, direction or decree has been passed ignoring the provisions of the Conservation Act of 1980 the same would not be binding. [7l8B-C]

(11) it any decree or order has already been obtained from any court relating to renewal of these leases, the same shall stand vacated, and similarly any appeal or other proceeding taken to obtain a renewal Or against order/decrees granting renewal shall also become nonest. [718G-H]

(12) Most of these mines are either within reserved forests or in forest lands as covered by the U.P. Amendment of the Forest Act. To these areas the Forest Conservation PG NO 694 Act applies and to allow mining ia these areas even under strictest control as a permanent feature would not only be violative of the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act but would be detrimental to restoration of the forest growth in a natural way in this area. Once the importance of forests is realised and as a matter of national policy and in the interests of the community, preservation of forests is accepted as the goal, nothing which would detract from that end should be permitted. In such circumstances, mining activity in this valley must be completely stopped. But such a situation will be available only after the original leases of the working mines are over. [726G-H; 727Al

(13) The court accepts the position that manufacture of drugs and sugar, as steel, would be hard-hit if mining activity in this area is stopped all of a sudden. With the pressing demand in the market and discovery of useful limestone deposits in other parts of the country apart from what has been indicated in the second affidavit of the Union of India, the trade would adjust itself as every economic activity does. However, the position should be monitored and the switch-over from the present position to a total ban should be spread over a period and not be sudden. [727D-E]

(14) In the circumstances, allowing the three on-going mines to operate for their initial period of lease is the most appropriate direction that can be given during the switch over from the present position to one of complete closing down of mining operation. [730C-H]

(15) There is no dispute that continuance of mining operations effects environment and ecology adversely and at the same time creates a prejudicial situation against conservation of forests. It is, therefore, necessary that each of these working mines shall have to work with an undertaking given to the Monitoring Committee that all care and attention shall be bestowed to preserve ecological and environmental balance while carrying on mining operations. [731D-E]

(16) The Court ordered the setting up of the Monitoring Committee to look after reafforestation, mining activities and all other aspects necessary to bring about natural normalcy in the Doon Valley. The Court also issued directions regarding the finances, powers and duties of the Monitoring Committee. [733E]

This, however, does not mean that the displaced mine owners PG NO 695 should not be provided with alternative occupation. Pious observation or even a direction in that regard may not be adequate. What is necessary is a time frame functioning if rehabilitation is to be made effective. It is, therefore, necessary that a Committee should be set up to oversee the rehabilitation of the displaced mine owners. [732B-C]

M.K. Banerjee, Solicitor General, M.K. Ramamurthy, A.K. Ganguli, A.K. Sen, R.K. Jain, Kapil Sibbal, B.D. Agarwal, O.P. Rana, F S. Nariman, Tapas Ray, Dr. L.M. Singhvi, Rajendra Sachhar, Yogeshwar Prasad, G.L. Sanghi, W.C. Mahajan, G.A. Shah, M.A. Krishnamurthy, R.P. Srivastava, Ms. A. Subhashni, Ravi Prakash Gupta, Mrs. Shobha Dikshit, Badri Dass Sharma, Aruneshwar Gupta, lnderbir Singh, Arun Jaitey, Ms. Bina Gupta, Atul Tewari, Raju Ramachandran, M.V. Goswami, S.K. Jain, E.C. Agarwal, S. Atreya, Ravi P. Wadhwani, M.G. Ramachandran, Mrs. Rachna Gupta, Dr. S.R. Srivastava, Pramod Dayal, Rishi Kesh, R.B. Mehrotra, C.M. Nayar, Mrs. M. Karanjawala, S.A. Syed, P.P. Juneja, P.K. Jain, K.N. Bhatt, D.N. Mishra, Ms. lndra Makwana, A. Subba Rao, Harjinder Singh, Parijat Sinha. C.P. Lal, Shri Narain, S.K. Gupta, K.R. Namibiar, S.S Khanduja, K.K. Jain,. D.M. Nargolkar, Devi Ditta Mal-ln-person, A.k. Panda, Ranjit Kumar, A.K. Shrivastava, A.K. Jain, A.D. Sanger. Pramod Dayal, R.S. Hedge, K.R. Nagaraja, P.K. Rao, M.N. Shroff.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATH MlSRA, J. On July 14, 1983, a letter received from the Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendera, Dehradun, bearing the date July 2, 1993, was Directed to be registered as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution and notice was ordered to the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Collector of Dehradun. Allegations of unauthorised and illegal mining in the Mussoorie- Dehradun belt which adversely affected the ecology of the area and led to environment disorder were made. Later on another application with similar allegations was directed to be tagged with the earlier one. That is how these two writ PG NO 696 petitions were both in the registry of this Court in a very innocuous manner as public interest litigation. The number of parties inflated both under the orders of the Court and on application to be added. Apart from the Governments of the Union and of Uttar Pradesh, several governmental agencies and mining lessees appeared in the proceedings.

What initially appeared to be two simple applications for limited relief got expanded into a comprehensive litigation requiring appointment of committees, inspection and reports in them from time to time, serious exercises on the part of the mine owners before the committees, filing of affidavits both original and further, and lengthy arguments at the Bar.These also necessitated several comprehensive interlocutory directions and orders. These two writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

On August If, 1983, this Court appointed a Committee for inspection of the mines with a view to securing assistance in the determination as to whether safety standards laid down in the Mines Act of 1952 and the Rules made thereunder have been followed and whether there was any danger of land- side on account of quarrying operations particularly during the rainy season, and if there was any other hazard to any individual, cattle or agricultural lands on account of carrying of the mining operations. At the preliminary stage this Court directed total stopping of blasting operations which, however, was modified later. The said Committee, referred to as the Bhargava Committee after its Chairman, classified the mines which it inspected into three groups, being A, B and C. It took note of the fact that earlier an Expert Committee known as the Working Group had been set up by the Union Government which had also inspected these mines. The Bhargava Committee was of the view that the C Group mines should be totally stopped; in the A Group mines, quarrying could be carried on after ensuring that there was no ecological or environmental hazard; and in regard to the B Group mines, the Committee opined that those may not be closed down permanently but the matter should be probed further.

A three-Judge Bench of this Court by an order dated March 12, 1985 (l985 3 SCR 169) directed closure of the C category mines as also certain B category mines on permanent basis and gave directions in regard to further action to be taken by the Bhargava Committee. While making the order the Court specifically stated that the reasons for the order would follow. One of the learned Judges constituting the three-Judge Bench retired from the Court on September 30, 1985, and the said learned Judge (A.N. Sen, J.) expressed his views in a short order dated 30th September, 1985. The PG NO 697 working Group appointed by the Union Government was also headed by the same Mr. Bhargava and had five other members.

The examination by the two Committees appeared to be with the same object, namely, as to whether the mining was being properly done and whether such activity should be carried on in this area. The Working Group and classified the mines into two categories being I and II. They put those mines which according to them were suitable for continuing operation under Category I and the mines which in their opinion were unsuitable for further mining under Category II. An interesting feature in these two Reports seems to be that almost the same lime stone quarries which have been put by the Bhargava Committee under Category A feature in Category I of the Working Group. This Court in its order of March 12, 1985, referred to those aspects and pointed out:

"It will thus be seen that both the Bhargav Committee and the Working Group were unanimous in their view that the lime stone quarries classified in category A by the Bhargav committee Report and category I by the Working Group were suitable for continuance of mining operations. So far as the lime stone quarries in category C of the Bhargav Committee Report are concerned, they were regarded by both the Bhargav Committee and the Working Group as unsuitable for continuance of mining operations and both were of the view that they should be closed down. The only difference between the Bhargav Committee and the Working Group was in regard to lime stone quarries classified in category B." This Court had also appointed an Expert Committee consisting of Prof. K.S. Valdia, Mr. Hukum Singh and Mr. D.N. Kaul to enquire and investigate into the question of disturbance of ecology and pollution and affectation of air, water and environment by reason of quarring operations or stone crushers and setting up of lime stone kilns. Mr. Kaul and Mr. Hukum Singh submitted a joint report with reference to various aspects indicated in their order of appointment while Prof. Valdia submitted a separate report. In the order of March 12. 1985, this Count took note of the position that Prof. Valdia's report was confined largely to the geological aspect and considerable reliance on the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) had been placed by him in making of the report and he had taken the view that the lime stone quarries which were dangerously close to the MBT should be closed down in such as that was a sensitive and vulnerable belt. This Court then took the view that not much PG NO 698 importance could be placed to Dr. Valdia's report for this litigation. The joint report submitted by Mr. Kaul and Mr. Hukum Singh had been taken into account by this Court in making interim directions and for the making of the final order no specific reference is called for.

In the order of March 12, 1985, this Court directed that the C Category mines of the Bhargav Committee Report should be closed down permanently and if any mining lessee of such a mine was running under the first grant or under Court's orders after its expiry, it would not be entitled to take advantage of the position. Similar order was made in regard to the B category mines situated in the Shasradhara block.

"We accordingly appoint a high powered Committee consisting of Mr. D. Bandyopadhyay, Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development as Chairman, and Shri H.S. Ahuja, Director General, Mines Safety, Dhanbad, Bihar, Shri D.N. Bhargav, Controller General, Indian Bureau of Mines, New Secretariat Building, Nagpur and two experts to be nominated by the Department of Environment. Government of India within four weeks from the date of this Order. The lessees of the lime stone quarries classified as category A in Bhargav Committee Report and for Category P in the Working Group Report and falling within the city limits of Mussoorie as also the lessees of the lime stone quarries classified as category B in the Bhargav Committee scheme for mining their lime stone quarries to this Committee (hereinafter called the Bandyopadhyay Committee) and if any such scheme or schemes are submitted the Bandyopadhyay Committee will proceed to examine the same without any unnecessary delay and submit a report to this Court whether in its opinion the particular lime stone quarry can be allowed to be operated in accordance with the scheme and if so, subject to what conditions and if it cannot be allowed to be operated, the reasons for taking that view. The Bandyopadhyay Committee in making its report will take into account the various aspects which we had directed the Bhargav Committee and the Kaul Committee to consider while making their reports including PG NO 699 the circumstances that the particular lime stone quarry may or may not be within the city limits of Mussoorie and also give an opportunity to the concerned lessee to be heard, even though it be briefly. " Several mining lessees submitted their schemes which were examined by the Committee but none of them was cleared.

Objections against rejection of the schemes had been filed before this Court by many of the aggrieved lessees. It was directed in the aforesaid order of 12th March, 1985, that until the Bandyopadhyay Committee cleared the particular mines for operation, mining activity in regard to all mines covered within the purview of examination by that Committee would stop. This Court, however, allowed A category mines located outside the city limits to operate. While directing closure of the Shasradhara area B category mines and all the C category mines, as also A and B category mines within the municipal limits this Court made it clear that the ban indicated by it would supersede any order of any other court. The Court observed:

"The consequence of this Order made by us would be that the lessees of lime stone quarries which have been directed to be closed down permanently under this Order or which may be directed to be closed down permanently after consideration of the report of the Bandyopadhyay).

Committee, would be thrown out of business in which they have invested large sums of money and expanded considerable time and effort. This would undoubtedly cause hardship to them but it is a price that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the people to live in healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance and without avoidable hazard to them and to their cattle, homes and agricultural land and undue affectation of air, water and environment. " The Order of 12th March, 1985, did not refer to the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 when it permitted the A category lime stone quarries located outside the city limits to operate.

This Court made several orders relating to specific aspects after the order of 12th March, 1985. One such order was made on 30th May, 1985, (1985 (3) SCC 614), another on '18th December, 1986, (1986 Suppl. SCC 517) where reasons for the order of 12th March, 1985, given, and yet another order was made on 19th October, 1987 (AIR 1987 SC 2426). We PG NO 700 shall refer to the last of these orders in a later part of this Judgment. In the order of 16th December, 1986, when the reasonings for the order dated 12th March, 1985 were given, this Court had stated:

"It is for the Government and the Nation-and not for the Court to-decide whether the deposits should be exploited at the cost of ecology and environmental consideration or the industrial requirement should be otherwise satisfied. It may be perhaps possible to exercise greater control and vigil over the operation and strike a balance between preservation and utilisation; that would indeed be a matter for an expert body to examine and on the basis of appropriate advice, Government should take a policy decision and firmly implement the same." The Court had also indicated in its earlier order that it should be ensured that the low grade cilica content lime stone is specifically utilised only in special industries having regard to its quality and should not be wasted by being utilised for purposes for which this special grade lime stone is not required.

Keeping these aspects in view, the Government of India in the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Department of Environment, Forests and wildlife, constituted a Committee to examine the working of the lime stone mining operations in the Doon Valley by its memorandum No. J-20012/48/86-1A, dated 30th of December, 1986, which was also called the Working Group. Shri D.N. Bhargava was nominated as Chairman and the Committee had three other members, namely, Shri V.C. Verma, Director General, Mines Safety, Dhanbad; Prof. B.D. Dhar, Department of Mining Engineering of the Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi; and Shri R. Mehta, Principal Scientific Officer, Department of Environment, Forest and Wildlife, New Delhi. Shri Verma was substituted by Shri N. Mishra, Deputy Director General, Northern Zone. The terms of reference of the Committee were:

"The limestone deposits of Dehradun-Mussoorie area are highly valuable mineral resource now essentially required by the steel industry and it would be necessary to exploit them, of course, in a very planned and systematic Manner.' The Committee addressed itself to two aspects, namely,- (i) those which were considered suitable for mining operations, and (ii) those which were considered unsuitable for further mining.

(i) Lambidhar limestone Mine of M/s Uttar Pradesh State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (UPSMDC) is a State Undertaking and holds a mining lease of 97 hectares covering the Lambidhar Hills and the lease is valid up to. 10th March, 1996. The Committee found that 36% of its production was supplied to steel and chemical industries, 12% to sugar, 6% to cement and other miscellaneous industries and 46% to chips and lime kilns industries and disapproved this position. It further found that while colour limestone which is a metamarphose is being recorded as a minor mineral whereas it was learnt that it was being used for despatch as major mineral. The arrangement for classification of the lime stone also was not acceptable to the Committee. It further found:

"The hill slopes and the river/nallah base are covered by scree generated both during road construction as well as subsequent mining operations. This is the result of allowing the excavated material to roll down the slopes. The Committee is of the opinion that road making may be done with front-end loader instead of bulldozer as with latter equipment excavated materials roll down the hill slope uncontrolably. The vegetation cover along the slopes has been damaged by the rolling material as well as the PG NO 702 excavation made for the road making and the hills present an ugly look. Hydro-seeding may be done to improve looks of hill slopes. Deposition of debris/scree in the nullahs specially in Betarli is the cause of concern because it happens to be one of the main steams which is source-of water supply to the villages as well as Dehradun city. The approach road has reached the top and mining operations have been started but not work on reclamation of mined out area has yet commenced. A proper disposal yard for stocking debris must be provided so that the present practice of disposing it near the camp office on the bank of the violet is prevented. Details of arrangements for controlling dust both in mining and crushing operations are not available." UPSMDC is the largest of the working mines and apart from the fact that it belongs to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, it has also the largest of investment. It has been claimed before us on its behalf that it operates most scientifically and satisfies all the requirements appropriate fOr ecological and environmental safeguards. The Report of the Committee, extracted above, negatives all these claims.

(ii) We shall now refer to M/S Punjab Lime and Limestone Company which has two mines both of which are working. Lease No. 14 covers 44.5 hectares and is a lease for 20 years from 1966; as such it has already expired. Lease No. 96 is for 28.92 hectares and would expire in December, 1989. Lease No. 14 had two areas and this Court disallowed mining in the Northern block. The Committee found that 16.4 hectares equal to 41 acres, out of lease No. 96 comprised of thick forest and the lessee had surrendered the forest area. The mining operation is being carried on in lease No. 14 under orders of the Court and the residual portion of lease No. 96. The Committee found that the scheme which had been offered to the Bandyopadhyay Committee was in regard to the mining in the northern block of lease No. 14 which has since been abandoned. It further transpires that about 27% of its output during 1986 was supplied for the steel industry. The report indicates that there is little generation of scree.

Disposal of overburden is not significant Check dams have been set up in the lower reaches which are on the right bank of Bhitarli river and no significant fall of the scree into the river was apprehended:

(iii) Next is lease No. 72 of Shri R.K. Oberai which would expire on 10th of April, 1994. It has an area of 15.92 PG NO 703 hectares. The Committee found that this mine lies in the upper reaches of the Song river. Thick forest growth is seen close to the mine and the Committee gathered that the forest authorities have declined permission to extend the mine workings beyond RL 1280. The Committee found that the lessee has undertaken to carry out afforestation and has also started compensatory forestory in the adjacent areas. There was no apprehension of spreading of scree and future mining operations are not likely to involve any significant deforestation. The Committee also has opined that there is no apprehension of choking of the water-ways due to mining operations as the Song river flows about 400 mts. away.

Apart from these three mines which are operating under valid mining leases, the Committee inspected the mines corresponding to Iease Nos. 16, 17 and 76, belonging to Ved Pal Singh Chaudhary, Seth Ram Avtar and Shri C.G. Gujral respectively. All these leases have expired in December, 1982, and under orders of different courts mining is being carried on.

Bhitarli Kalan Limestone Mines of Shri Ved Pal Singh Chaudhary was a lease for 38.8 hectares and expired on 29th December, 1982. This Court has already directed closure of mining operation in a small area on the left bank of Bhitarli river.

Seth Ram Avtar has a lease of 14. 18 hectares on the left bank of Bhitarli river and the lease expired on 2nd December, 1982. The Committee found that he had no environment management plan. The working plan submitted by the Iessee did not show any plantation area.

The last of the working mines which the Committee visited is that of Shri C.G. Gujaral. The Iease was for 24.16 hectares and expired on 17th December, 1983. The Committee found that the Iease area contained very good forest. The rolling of scree/debris along the slopes had left not only ugly scars but also resulted in destruction of the green cover. The debris flow has also choked the Sansaru nullah which once used to be a perennial stream. There was no environmental management plan. In fact the Committee came to the conclusion that the working of this mine was not conducive to the environmental conservation.

We have in another part of this judgment indicated our conclusion that mining activity as a whole should be stopped in the Doon Valley but for the reasons indicated therein, we have also come to the conclusion that the three mining PG NO 704 lessees who have been operating under valid lease may be permitted to work subject to such conditions as have been indicated. Keeping the report of the Working Group in view and for the reasons we have elsewhere indicated, we direct that mining operations in lease Nos. 16, 17 and 76 where the respective leases have expired and mining operation is being carried on under Court's Orders, shall stop and the several orders of the courts enabling mining activity shall stand superseded.

"We are of the view that the stone quarrying in the Doon Valley area should generally be stopped and reasons therefor we shall provide in due course." In another part of this judgment, reasons in support of that conclusion have been provided. The direction to close down the three operating mines where the period of lease has expired is to bring the position in accord with that conclusion.

One of the submissions advanced at the Bar is that the decision of this Court dated 12th March, 1985, was final in certain aspects including the release of the A category mines outside the city limits of Mussoorie from the proceedings and in view of such finality it is not open to this Court in the same proceedings at 3 latter stage to direct differently in regard to what has been decided earlier. Connected with this submission is the contention that during the pendency of these writ petitions, the Environmental (Protection) Act of 1986 has come into force and since that Statute and the Rules made: there under provide detailed procedure to deal with the situations that arise in these cases, this Court should no more deal with the matter and leave it to be looked into by the authorities under the Act. Counsel have relied upon what was stated by this Court while giving reasons in support of the order of March 12, 1985, namely, "it is for the Government and the Nation-and not for the Court-to decide whether the deposits should be exploited at the cost of ecology and environmental considerations." In the order of 12th March, 1985, this Court had pointed out:

"So far as the lime stone quarries classified as category). A in the Bhargav Committee Report and/or category 1 in the Working Group Report are concerned, we would divide them into two classes, one class consisting of those lime PG NO 705 stone quarries which are within the city limits of Mussoorie and the other consisting of those which are outside the city limits. We take the view that the lime stone quarries falling within category A of the Bhargav Committee Report and/or category 1 of the Working Group Report and falling outside the city limits of Mussoorie, should be allowed to the operated subject, of course, to the observance of the requirements of the Mines Act, 1952, the Metalliferous Mines Regulations, 1961 and other relevant statutes, rules and regulations. Of course when we say this, we must make it clear that we are not holding that if the leases in respect of these lime stone quarries have expired and suits or writ petitions for renewal of the leases are pending in the courts, such leases should be automatically renewed. It will be for the appropriate courts to decide whether such leases should be renewed or not having regard to the law and facts of each case. So, far as the lime stone quarries classified in category A in the Bhargav Committee Report and category 1 in the Working Group Report and falling within the city limits of Mussoorie are concerned, we would give the same direction which we are giving in the next succeeding paragraph in regard to the lime stone quarries classified as category B in the Bhargav Committee Report." The argument that A category mines outside the city limits had been cleared is based upon what has been indicated above. Dealing with this of the direction, this Court in its order of 19th October, 1987, stated :

Everyday that consciousness as also the sense of social obligation in this regard are on the increase. It has been pointed out to us in course of hearing of the objections that the classification of the A category Iime stone quarries on the basis of their location-within the municipal limits and outside--was indeed not a real one. We have been shown and it seems to be factually true that some of the lime stone quarries said to be outside the city limits are closer to the heart of the city of Mussoorie that others located within the city limits. If the real purpose of the order made by this Court was not to permit mining within the PG NO 706 city limits without further scrutiny as in the case of B category stone quarries, we really do not see any justification as to why these stone quarries located outside the city limits but close to the heart of the city should not have been subjected to such scrutiny. Since the writ petitions have not been finally disposed of and the order made in regard to the A category quarries located outside the city limits by the judgment referred to above only exempted them from further scrutiny as was directed in respect of the other quarries, we see no impediment in the matter of giving a re-look at the matter even with reference to the A category quarries located outside the city limits.

In this connection it is relevant to take note of the fact that the State Government has already formed an improvement programme of the area by constituting a combined body for Mussoorie and Dehradun. The considerations which had weighed with the Court on the basis of municipal limits has indeed to be extended not to the entire area covered by the new scheme. We are, therefore of the view that the A category stone quarries in this area irrespectlve of location within or outside city limits should be subjected to further order of this Court and there is no legal impediment for this Court to do the same." We reiterate our opinion that by the order of 12th March, 1985, the A category mining leases outside the city Iimits were only exempted from further scrutiny and not released from the proceedings. Our order of 18th December, 1986, left certain aspects to be considered by the State and immediately the Central Government responded by appointing the second Working Group. We would like to reiterate what we have already said in the order of 19th of October, 1987, that the examination by this Court when it made the order of 12th March, 1985, omitted to consider the impact of the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 which was then a statute in force. If the provisions of the Conservation Act had been noticed and impact thereof for the continuance of mining activity had been considered, perhaps the Court would have made no exemptions and no mining may have been permitted.

PG NO 707 In view of what we have indicated above, it is difficult to accept the stand taken by some of the lessees and by Mr. Nariman appearing for the intervener that a final order has been by this Court in regard to the A category mines outside the city limits of Mussoorie.

The writ petitions before us are not inter-party disputes and have been raised by way of public interest litigation and the controversy before the Court is as to whether the social safety and for creating a hazardfess environment for the people to live in, mining in the area should be permitted or stopped. We may not be taken to have said that for public interest litigations, procedural laws do not apply. At the same time it has to be remembered that every technicality in the procedural law is not available as a defence when a matter of grave public importance is for consideration before the Court. Even if it is said that there was a final order, in a dispute of this type it would be difficult to entertain the plea of res judicata. As we have already pointed out when the order of 12th6 March, 1985, was made, no reference to the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 had been done. We are of the view that leaving the question open for examination in future would lead to unnecessary multiplicity of proceedings and would be against the interests of society. It is mete and proper as also in the interest of the parties that the entire question is taken into account at this stage.

Undoubtedly, the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) has come into force with effect from 19th November, 1986. Under this Act power is vested in the Central Government to take measures to protect and improve the environment. These writ petitions were filed as early as 1983-more than three years before the Act came into force.

This Court appointed several expert Committees, received their reports and on the basis of materials placed before it, made directions, partly final and partly interlocutory, in regard to certain mines in the area. Several directions from time to time have been made by this Court. As many as four reportable orders have been given. The several parties and their counsel have been heard for days together on different issues during the three and a quarter years of the pendency of the proceedings. The Act does not purport to- and perhaps could not-take away the jurisdiction of this Court to deal with a case of this type. In consideration of these facts, we do not think there is any justification to decline the exercise of jurisdiction at this stage.

Ordinarily the Court would not entertain a dispute for the adjudication of which a special provision has been made by law but that rule is not attracted in the present situation in these cases. Besides it is a rule of practice and prudence and not one of jurisdiction. The contention against PG NO 708 exercise of jurisdiction advanced by Mr. Nariman for the intervener and reiterated by some of the lessees before this Court must stand overruled.

Kalidas, the greatest of the Indian poets, sang the praises of the Himalayas in 'Meghadoot' by describing it as the loftiest mountain on earth surface located on the north of the country. The Himalayan ranges apart from operating as a natural seal on the northern border against intruders, have influenced the climate, culture, ecology and environment of the sub continent. These are the ranges from where originate several perennial rivers like the Ganges and the Yamuna. These two rivers which mingle at Allahabad and later flow into the Bay of Bengal as one river have built up what is known as the gangetic belt-the most fertile part of lndia. The lcgendary tradition of our culture is deeply associated with these two rivers. Apart from providing succour to millions of people who inhabit this belt. Yamuna is said to have provided the backdrop of Krishna Leela. The catchment area of this river is spread over the Mussoorie Hills-otherwise known as the Doon Valley with which we are concerned. Before a quarter of a century, Yamuna was having adequate water flow through-out the year. Unlike the Ganges which has her main tributaries originating from the snow- clad regions of the mountain range and melting snow in summer helping the tributaries to be perennial, the Yamuna used to receive the bulk of her water from the streams joining her in the lower regions. The Doon Valley used to receive sumptuous rains during the season; the tree roots helped the water to be stored; the lime stone mines operated as aquifers. The stored water was released in a continuous process and that streams even without the support of melting snow, provided perennial supply to the Yamuna.

Lime stone mining operations in the Doon Valley became wide-spread during the decade between 1955 and 1965 and many of the leases were granted in 1962. In the decade after 1965. the depredation, of mining began to be felt. Peace and tranquillity of the Valley was gone. Trees were felled at random and lush green forests disappeared. Blasting affected and shook up the hills. Rocks and scree rolled down and killed or injured the cattle, damaged the cultivable lands and adversely affected the villagers. The natural beauty of PG NO 709 the Queen of the hill stations was no more to be seen. With the felling of the forests, rains became less, with the trees gone and the lime stone dug out, the aquifers ceased to exist. The streams got blocked by scree and stones and the flow of water was substantially reduced. Tourist traffic was adversely affected. Irrigation was no more possible. The tributaries no longer fed the Yamuna sufficiently. Dehradun experienced scarcity of even drinking water. These led to the despatch of the letter in July, 1983 to this Court.

The Doon Valley lime stone deposits are a gift of Nature to mankind. Underneath the soil cover there is an unseen store house of bountry almost everywhere. Similarly forests provide the green belt and are a bequest of the past generations to the present. Lime stone deposits if excavated and utilised get exhausted while if forests are exploited, there can be regeneration provided reafforestation is undertaken. Trees, however, take time to grow and ordinarily a 15 to 25 year period is necessary for such purpose.

We have already indicated that several expert Committees appointed by this Court have opined generally against continuing the mining activity in the Valley. The Second Working Group found in as late as 1987 that limited mining in the on-going mines was not congenial to ecological and environmental discipline. This Court by its order on October 19, 1987, (AlR 1987 SC 2426) called the Union of India:

"..... to place before the Court on affidavit the minimum total requirement of this grade of lime stone for manufacture of quality steel and defence armaments. The affidavit should also specify as to how much of high grade ore is being imported into the country and as to whether other indigenous sources are available to meet such requirement. This Court would also require an affidavit from responsible authorities of the Union of lndia as to whether keeping the principles of ecology, environmental protection and safeguards and anti-pollution measures, it is in the interest of the Society that the requirements should be met by import or by taking other alternate indigenous sources or mining activity in this area should be permitted to a limited extent. The Court expects the Union of lndia to balance these two aspects and place on record its stand not as a party to the litigation but as a protector of the PG NO 710 environment in discharge of its statutory and social obligation for the purpose of consideration of the Court . .

The two affidavits filed on behalf of the Union of India have been dealt with elsewhere in the judgment and it would be sufficient for the instant aspect to extract from the affidavit of Mr. Seshan, Secretary to the Government in the Ministry of Environment and Forests, where he has stated :

"5.1 Union of India submits that from the point of view of protection of the environment in the unique Doon Valley, it would be desirable that lime stone mining operations in the Valley are stopped completely." Nariman questioned the value of this statement in view of the indication in the affidavit that it was the department's submission to the Court. We do not think that the Ministry Secretary's affidavit can be brushed aside that way. Read in the background of the directions in the Order of 19th October, 1987, and in the sequence of the first affidavit not having been accepted by the Court as compliance, we must assume that Mr. Seshan has disclosed the stand of the Union of India with full authority and with the intention of binding the Union of India by his statement.

We are separately dealing with the Forest (Conservation) Act and its bearing and effect on this aspect. It is sufficient to note that the Act does not permit mining in the forest area. We are also satisfied that if mining activity even to a limited extent is permitted in future, it would be not congenial to ecology and environment and the natural calm and peace which is a special feature of this area in its normal condition shall not be restored. This tourist zone in its natural setting would certainly be at its best if its serenity is restored in the fullest way. We are of the considered opinion that mining activity in this Valley must be completely stopped but as indicated in another part of this judgment such a situation will be available only after the original leases of the working mines are over.

It is time to turn to the contention relating to forests. Air and water are the most indispensable gifts of Nature for preservation of life. Abundant sun-shine together with adequate rain keeps Nature's generating force at work.

PG NO 711 Our ancestors knew that trees were friends of mankind and forests were necessary for human existence and civilization to thrive. It is these forests that provided shelter for the 'Rishies ' and accommodated the ancient 'Gurukulas'. They too provided food and sport for our forefathers living in the State of Nature. That is why there is copious reference to forests in the Vedas and the ancient literature of ours.

Live in a lovely spirit." In due course civilization developed and men came to live away from forests. Yet the human community depended fieavily upon the forests which caused rains and provided timber, fruits, herbs and sports. With sufficient sun-shine and water there was luxuriant growth of forests in the tropical and semi-tropical zones all over the globe. Then came the age of science and outburst of human population.

Man required more of space for living as also for cultivation as well as more of timber. In that pursuit the forests were cleared and exploitation was arbitrary and excessive; the deep forests were depleted; consequently rainfall got reduced; soil erosion took place. The earth crust was washed away and places like Cherapunji in Assam which used to receive an average annual rainfall of 500 inches suffered occasional drought.

They came to know that forests preserve the soil and heavy humus acts as a porous reservoir for retaining water and gradually releasing it in a sustained flow. The trees in the forests draw water from the bowls of the earth and release the same into the atmosphere by the process of transpiration and the same is received back by way of rain as a result of condensation of clouds formed out of the atmospheric moisture. Forests thus help the cycle to be completed. Trees are responsible to purify the air by releasing oxygen into the atmosphere through the process of photosynthesis. It has, therefore, been rightly said that there is a balance on earth between air, water, soil and plant. Forests hold up the mountains, cushion the rains and they discipline the rivers and control the floods. They sustain the springs;

In the second half of the 19th Century felling of trees came to be regulated. In 1858, the Department of Forestry was set up and in 1864 the first Inspector General of Forests was appointed. In the following year the first Indian Forest Act came into the Statute Book to be followed by another Act in 1878 and yet another in 1927 which is still in force providing measures of regulation. This Act has been amended in the various States and presently reference shall be made to the relevant amendments in Uttar Pradesh.

During the Second World War Indian forests were very badly mauled for various defence purposes. By the time India became independent it had about 2 per cent of the earth's land area, 1 per cent of productive forest area 15 per cent of world's population and 10 per cent of world's animal life-a situation indicative of the fact that there was acute deficit of forest area. The Government of lndia declared its National Forest Policy in 1452 which laid down that forests should occupy 33 per cent of the land surface as against 23 per cent then attention was intended to the bestowed for expansion of forests in each of the Five-Year Plans that followed with a view to rehabilitating the forests. The demand occasioned by the growing population and the spread of economic development and consequent demand of timber as raw material as also feul led a excessive exploitation of the forests and consequent clearing of forest areas notwithstanding the declared of National Forest Policy.

It is interesting to note that the national per capita average of forest area works out to 0. 11 hectare as against an international average of 1.5 hectare. State-wise, Arunachal Pradesh has per capita forest of 8.2.1 hectares which is the maximum and Haryana has the minimum being 0.01 hectare (figures based on Census Report of 1981 and the report of the Central Forestry Commission). While some of the advanced countries like Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan and United States have forest cover of higher area, on account of want of regulation and appropriate care and attention, this unhappy situation has arisen in India.

PG NO 713 `The treeless expense of land provides an environment least conductive to healthy living. Tree leaves recharge the atmosphere with life giving oxygen, take away excess carbondioxide and transmit moisture to the atmosphere by way of transpiration. It is estimated that one hectare of woodland consumes 3.7 tonnes of carbondioxide and gives out 2 tonnes of oxygen per year. Denied these beneficial processes, life becomes lead heavy. A tree-covered environment is much healthier to live and work in. Amongst the immediately perceptible effects of loss of vegetative protection are soil erosion, floods and droughts. If trees and other vegetations are present, they bear the burnt of winds, heat, cold and rain water, first in their crowns and foliage. The soil remains covered by humus, decomposing litter and freshly fallen leaves which protect it from direct action of the adverse natural forces. In a wooded area the flow of rain water gets regulated through the Ieaves and the spongy material overlying the soil; but in a barren, unprotected surface the rain drops hit the soil directly and the water flows torrentially, dislodging and carrying with it the soil participles which have taken hundreds of years to form. This results in disastrous floods in lower areas causing damage to life and property. Fast running water also causes landslides and other calamities en route. With all the rain water having run away in the form of floods the land surface losses its resiliance to drier spells and severe droughts are caused. The removal of soil by water produces fertility and the productive capacity of the up-lands to a considerable degree.

It is estimated that nearly 6,000 million tonnes of soil is washed away every year in floods. With that go 6.0 million tonnes of nutrients-more than the amount that is applied in the form of fertilisers." We shall now deal with legislative measures to preserve the forests and impact of such provisions on mining after briefly referring to the legislative power in regard to forests.

"Forest" was initially a State subject covered by Entry 19 in List II of the Seventh Schedule: In 1976, under the 42nd Amendment the entry was deleted and entry 17-A in the Concurrent List was inserted. The change from the State List to the Concurrent List was brought about following the PG NO 714 reallsation of the Central Government that forests were of national importance and should be placed in the Concurrent List to enable the Central Government to deal with the matter. The same amendment of the Constitution brought in Article 48-A in Part IV providing thus:

"The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country." Article 51-A in Part IV-A of the Constitution inserted by the same amendment provided a set of fundamental duties and clause (g) runs thus:

"It shall be the duty of every citizen of India- (g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures." 1972 marks a watershed in the history of environmental management so far as India is concerned. The National Committee of Environment and Planning and Coordination was set up and various steps were taken to implement the recOmmendations already made and to be made: thereafter. The National Commission on Agricultural in 1976 noticed the inadequate implementation of the 1953 National Forest Policy and proposed the following amendments:

PG NO 715 The problem of forest preservation and protection was no more to be separated from the life style of tribals. The approach required a shift from the dependence on law and executive implementation to dependence on the conscious and voluntary participation of the masses. This required educating the masses as well as appropriate education of the departmental employees. In this background the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 was enacted with which we propose presently to deal after noticing certain provisions of the Indian Forest Act of 1927.

The first three categories deal with forests which are Government property while the last refers to control over forests and lands which are not Government property. Most of the private forests covered under the fourth category were earlier parts of estates which have now been abolished and thus such forests have also become Government property. In Uttar Pradesh there have been several amendments of the Forest Act and Chapter V-A has been incorporated which provides for control over forests of claimants. Detailed procedure has been laid in Chapter II in respect of reserved forests. Section 3 vests power in the State Government to reserve forests. The process for reservation of forests starts with section 4 and ends up with the final declaration under section 20. Section 27 vests power in the State Government to declare a forest to be no longer reserved.

As noticed earlier, notwithstanding the regulatory provisions in the Forest Act of 1927 and the Government's National Forest Policy of 1952, forests generally got rapidly depleted. To meet this alarming situation the Forest (Conservation) Ordinance of 1980 was promulgated by the President and the Ordinance was followed by the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980. The statement of objects and reasons, as far as relevant, point out:

With a view to checking further deforestation the President promulgated on the 25th October, 1980, the Forest (Conservation) Ordinance, 1980. The Ordinance made the prior approval of the Central Government necessary for dereservation of forests and for use of forest land for non- forest purposes. The Ordinance also provided for the constitution of an advisory committee to advice the Central Government with regard to grant of such approval." Section 2 of the Act which is relevant provides:

best autism center & school in noida | milestone therapy center

Tailored Education to make learning possible for all children. Special education is a system of personalized education, where methods are customized as per the childs learning requirements. Children with special learning needs often have unique learning techniques, which makes it essential to provide a tailor-made learning system for them. Thats what makes special education necessary.

Understanding the childs psychological reactions to recommend changes that help them lead a better life. Psychological Assessment is the process of understanding the childs behavior and personality to determine their strengths and weaknesses and provide recommendations for behavioral and academic improvement.

Equipping children for a normal every day. Occupational Therapy (OT) is a branch of healthcare that empowers people with physical, sensory, and cognitive problems to lead a healthy life. With multiple therapies, exercises, and activities, an Occupational Therapist helps people gain independence and perform everyday tasks without assistance.

Helping children meet their developmental milestones. Early Intervention services help infants and toddlers meet their developmental milestones. Childrens brain develops to about 90% by age 5, and they learn and grasp a lot of essential skills and understanding by then.

Promoting the desired behavior. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) is a therapy that works on promoting the desired behaviors and limiting or eliminating the undesired ones. It helps analysts understand how behavior works, what triggers it, and how a person learns. Using this information, the Behavioral analysts teaches the patients skills that increase desired social, motor, and verbal behavior with reasoning power.

Helping children express themselves fluently. Speech therapy is the process of evaluating and treating speech and language disorders. In Speech Therapy, the therapist uses various techniques to improve communication. It involves articulation, fluency, expressiveness, cognitive abilities, and many others.

Autism is a developmental disorder that disrupts the cognitive, emotional, social, and physical health of the concerned person. It is a difficult situation for children and affects their developmental milestones. Children affected by Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) show varied symptoms like awkward social interactions, repetitive movements, and self-abusive behavior.

Understanding the childs psychological reactions to recommend changes that help them lead a better life. Psychological Assessment is the process of understanding the childs behavior and personality to determine their strengths and weaknesses and provide recommendations for behavioral and academic improvement.

Tailored Education to make learning possible for all children. Special education is a system of personalized education, where methods are customized as per the childs learning requirements. Children with special learning needs often have unique learning techniques, which makes it essential to provide a tailor-made learning system for them. Thats what makes special education necessary.

What is a Vocational Training? Vocational training is the teaching of essential skills that prepare people for work. Our institute provides vocational training for people with special abilities. The program teaches students skills like making candles, flowers, jewelry, gardening, paper plates, and many others based on the persons interest.

Dr. Isha is very dedicated and experienced person about her work. She devotes much time and efforts per child. I have seen lots of good changes and improvement in my daughter. I suggest everyone who are looking for occupational therapy or any Milestone delay to plz visit Ms. Isha tyagi first.

Dr.Isha is extremely good with the kids. My child had achieved remarkable improvement while he was going to her. I would definitely suggest that shes amongst the best for early intervention. I wish her luck & success.

Dr. ISHA has helped our child immensely in developing his overall personality We have been associated with Dr.Isha for the last 3 yearsHer personal attention to every child helps in faster learning for the child. Thank you so much MaamAll the best best.