NGT Imposes Rs. 50 Crore on Karnataka Irrigation Department: Dredging and De-Silting of Dams Not Exempted by Obtaining Prior Environmental Clearance

NGT Imposes Rs. 50 Crore on Karnataka Irrigation Department: Dredging and De-Silting of Dams Not Exempted by Obtaining Prior Environmental Clearance

The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Southern Zone, Chennai by its division member bench of Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana (Judicial Member) and Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati (Expert Member) while adjudication an application, observed that dredging and desilting of dams is not exempted from obtaining prior Environmental Clearance as the sand is being extracted for commercial purpose, hence de-siltation/extraction of sand from silt for sale undertaken was held as illegal.

The factual matrix of the case is that the District Sand Monitoring Committee had issued a work order to Karnataka State Mineral Corporation Ltd. (KSMCL)- Respondent No. 5, for de-siltation work involving extraction of 14,51,680 MT of sand from backwaters of Adhyapadi Dam on Phalguni River in Managluru Taluka and Shamburu Dam on Nethravathi River in Bantwal Taluka, both located in Dakshin Kannada District, Karnataka.

While the work order was issued, there was no condition to obtain Environmental Clearance, and on 1 December, 2021 an amendment was brought in the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 incorporating Sand Mining Policy, 2020.

The Deputy Commissioner- Respondent No. 4 on 23 May, 2022 stated that dredging of the Adhyapadi and Shamburu Dams are allowed and sand collected will be sold commercially. As any sand mining attracts requirement of an Environmental Clearance, the applicant had approached the Deputy Commissioner highlighting the illegal sand mining being carried out in Adhyapadi and Shamburu Dams in the guise of dredging and de-silting without prior Environmental Clearance requesting to stop the same.

No response was given by the Deputy Commissioner; hence the applicant approached the NGT.

The two questions that arose for consideration was:

1. Whether prior Environmental Clearance is mandatory for de-siltation of dams when extraction of sand for commercial use is envisaged as per Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994?

2. Whether the exemption granted under Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006 to dredging and de-silting of dam is applicable when it involves mining of sand or silt intended for commercial purpose/Government use?

The Tribunal after noting the work order, observed that it was not only for dredging or de-silting but also mining of the sand to increase the capacity of water storage in the dams referred above. The Tribunal was of the view that by reading the work order and conditions, it was clear that the work order is issued to (i) increase the capacity of the water storage, (ii) sell the sand available at the rate fixed by the Government by storing the same in the stockyard. The sale was to be only in favor of Government and public works at the rate fixed by the Government and the sand Monitoring Committee.

Further, the Tribunal while adverting to EIA Notification, 2006, Appendix IX which provides for cases which are exempted from prior Environmental Clearance as per Clause 7(1)(B) observed that, “the said exemption of dredging and de-silting of the dams are only for the purpose of maintenance, upkeep and disaster management and if the said activity involves commercial sand mining, then the exemption is not attracted.”

Next, the Tribunal adverted to the Sustainable Sand Mining Guidelines, 2016 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) on de-silting activity which involves extraction of sand, NGT was of the considered view that, in the given case the desilting was done not only for the upkeep and maintenance of the dams but to extract the sand from the silt to be sold at the rate fixed by the Government which was admittedly a commercial activity.

“As it involves the commercial activity by any stretch of imagination, it cannot be stated that the dredging activity is exempted as provide in Clause 6 of Appendix IX of EIA Notification, 2006. Therefore, the said impugned work order dated 27 November, 2020 is contrary to the EIA Notification, 2006 for not having obtained the Environmental Clearance,” noted the bench.

In addition to this, the Tribunal highlighted that the amendment to the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 was brought on 16 December, 2013 incorporating a new Chapter II A, was applicable to all minor minerals on systematic, scientific mining protection of environment, wherein Quarrying Plan, Environmental Management Plan and Environmental Clearance are made mandatory.

The bench asserted that once it becomes mandatory that such work order must be preceded by an Environmental Clearance, all the other requirements as defined in Clause 7 of EIA Notification, 2006 have to be followed and in order to make an inventory of river bed material a detailed survey of the district needs to be carried out to identify the source of river bed material and alternative source of sand.

Thus, the NGT held that, Environmental Clearance is required when de-silted material is used for commercial purpose. The current orders of the District Collector were in gross violation.

The NGT directed Chief Secretary to issue orders to Collectors to follow all the rules and regulations scrupulously and strictly instruct them that desilting/dredging of water bodies/rivers/reservoirs/waterways shall not be permitted without the prior Environmental Clearance when the de-silted/dredged material be it silt, sand or any other mineral is sold either to the public or for Government projects.

Lastly, the NGT imposed a penalty of Rs. 50 crore is to be paid by the Irrigation Department, Government of Karnataka to Central Pollution Control Board.