The High Court of Jharkhand has disposed of a decade-long Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by issuing a comprehensive set of directions to combat rampant illegal stone mining and unauthorized crusher units in the Hazaribagh district. The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar, emphasized that the right to a clean and pollution-free environment is an integral facet of the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court observed a significant “failure of the enforcement machinery” in translating regulations into field-level accountability, noting that “the soul of this region has undergone a profound and painful transformation.”
Background
The writ petition, filed by Hemant Kumar Shikarwar in 2013, highlighted the ecological crisis in Hazaribagh, historically known as the “City of a Thousand Gardens.” The petitioner alleged that illegal stone mining, particularly in the Ichak region and around the Siwane River, was being conducted by local mafias in active collusion with the local administration. The petition stated that these unmonitored operations emitted massive quantities of fugitive dust, damaging approximately 100 hectares of cultivable land and endangering the lives of residents through unregulated explosive use and abandoned, water-filled mining pits.
Arguments of the Parties
The petitioner relied on information obtained under the RTI Act to argue that crusher units were operating without valid explosive licenses, mineral dealer registrations, or statutory environmental clearances. It was submitted that despite repeated representations, authorities failed to take effective coercive steps.
The respondent authorities filed several affidavits over the past decade acknowledging the situation and listing measures taken, including the formation of District and State Level Committees, the filing of FIRs, and the demolition of some crusher machines. In later submissions, the District Mining Officer contested the petitioner’s claim that Village Tepsa fell within an ‘Eco-Sensitive Zone,’ citing a 2019 MoEFCC notification.
Court’s Analysis
The Court noted that while Village Tepsa was not officially listed as an Eco-Sensitive Zone, the absence of a “protected label” did not grant a license for “ecological destruction.” The Bench scrutinized the “administrative dormancy” and “institutional lethargy” of the District Level Task Force (DLTF), noting that records of meetings were sporadic and re-emerged only after judicial intervention.
The Court observed:
“Where technology provides the digital ‘eyes’ to see, a continued failure to act can only be interpreted as a deliberate, willful closing of those eyes, or a choice to ignore what those eyes clearly see.”
The Court criticized the practice of merely registering FIRs without pursuing them to finality. Referring to the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decisions in State of N.C.T of Delhi vs Sanjay and Jayant v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Bench held that prosecutions under the IPC and the MMDR Act are simultaneously maintainable. The Court further noted that abandoned mining pits had become “death traps” and “attractive nuisances,” violating the safety protocols under the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004.
Citing the ‘Polluter Pays’ Principle from Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India and the ‘Public Trust Doctrine’ from Fomento Resorts, the Court held that the state’s duty to protect natural resources is absolute.
The Decision
Disposing of the petition, the Court issued the following key directions:
- Mandatory Meetings: The DLTF, Hazaribagh, must convene at least once every month, with minutes uploaded to official websites within seven days.
- Verification of Permissions: The DLTF must review all statutory permissions (CTE, CTO, Explosive Licenses) for units in the Ichak region. No mining or crusher activity is permitted until all permissions are verified.
- Buffer Zones: Reiteration of a 1 km buffer zone around Hazaribagh Wildlife Sanctuary and specific restrictions for forest land (500m for mining, 400m for crushers).
- Technological Warfare: Implementation of a technology-driven regime including high-resolution CCTV at transit routes and mandatory GPS tracking on all heavy machinery within 12 weeks.
- Legal Action: The District Mining Officer must initiate formal complaints under Section 22 of the MMDR Act and proceedings under Section 21(5) for recovery of the market value of illegally extracted minerals.
- Environmental Compensation: The Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board must assess and impose environmental compensation on non-compliant units within 12 weeks, applying the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle.
- Reclamation: All abandoned or illegal mines must be secured and reclaimed within eight weeks using mine closure funds.
- Accountability: The Deputy Commissioner, SP, DMO, and Pollution Control Board officials must file individual compliance reports within four months.
The Court clarified that these directions do not preclude additional coercive measures or criminal prosecution against those conniving with illegal operators.
Case Title: Hemant Kumar Shikarwar vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
Case No.: W.P. (PIL) No. 290 of 2013
Bench: Chief Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar
Date: May 07, 2026
