“The fulcrum of the issue is bringing about the balance in the light of the principles of sustainable development. In that view, we are of the opinion that keeping in account the failure of the State to place any material before this Court to ensure scientific mining and recommend any preventive measures, this Court deems it necessary to form a committee consisting of officers with subject knowledge and who are members of independent institutions to make a study and submit a report,” the bench said on December 31 last year.
The bench observed that Uttarakhand falls in the highest seismic risk zone and has a long history of landslides and environmental disasters. (Image enhanced using AI)
Background
The litigation arose from reports of extensive and unregulated mining activities in both leased and non-leased areas of Bageshwar district, which allegedly led to land subsidence, cracks on hill slopes, landslides, choking of rivers and water bodies, and large-scale ecological degradation.
The court took suo moto cognisance of the matter in 2025 and during the course of the hearing.
Arguments
Amicus curiae and advocate Dushyant Mainali submitted a report which made a number of recommendations.
The court was informed that a state-level committee headed by the additional director, department of geology and mining, had inspected 61 mines and submitted a report flagging serious violations, including dumping of mining waste into rivers.
Story continues below this ad
An affidavit filed by Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS) stated that permissions granted by it were “without prejudice to other applicable laws” and that mining operations must strictly comply with conditions imposed under the Environment (Protection) Act.
DGMS further asserted that any permission contrary to environmental clearance conditions would be deemed withdrawn with immediate effect.
Observations
Emphasising the fragile nature of the Himalayan ecosystem, the court observed that Uttarakhand falls in the highest seismic risk zone and has a long history of landslides and environmental disasters.
The bench directed the formation of an independent expert committee comprising specialists from premier institutions, including scientists from Council Of Scientific And Industrial Research (CSIR), Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology, G B Pant Institute, and the Geological Survey of India, along with noted Himalayan ecology expert professor Ajay Singh Rawat.
Story continues below this ad
The committee has been asked to submit interim reports every 15 days, starting January 15, 2026, on whether mining can be carried out without causing irreversible environmental damage.
“The expert body shall also recommend the method and manner of mining, provided the environment and topography permits the kind of mining,” the court ordered.
The bench said that the state had failed to place material before the court demonstrating that scientific and safe mining practices were being followed.
The court said that the report by the Amicus is not only extensive but also informative and the manner and method in which the report has been prepared and the various parameters considered to prepare the report reflect insight and in depth knowledge.
Story continues below this ad
The court also praised the Amicus stating that he has been “zealously assisting the court” on the issue.
“The Committee may consult Shri Dushyant Mainali, learned Amicus Curiae with regard to any legal necessities or requirements,” it directed.
The bench also took note of a report by the superintendent of police, Bageshwar, which revealed the seizure of 124 heavy machines from various mining sites, indicating large-scale violations of environmental norms.
During the proceedings, it emerged that while mining leases and environmental clearances issued by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) permitted only manual and semi-mechanised mining, several leaseholders were found using heavy and very heavy machinery.
Story continues below this ad
However, DGMS later clarified that such permissions did not override environmental clearance conditions and that mine owners had failed to disclose the prohibition on heavy machinery while seeking approvals.
The bench observed that Uttarakhand falls in the highest seismic risk zone and has a long history of landslides and environmental disasters. (Image enhanced using AI)
