SC allows limited mining in chinkara sanctuary

SC allows limited mining in chinkara sanctuary
PRESS TRUST OF INDIA

NEW DELHI, FEB 19: The Supreme Court has asked the Gujarat Government to set up a high-levelcommittee to study the impact on environment due to limited mining in thereserve forest of Narayan Sarovar sanctuary, home to about 1200 endangeredchinkaras.

A division bench headed by Justice G T Nanavati, since retired, alsorestrained the government from giving permission to others to carry outmining operation or to put up cement plant within the area of 10 kms fromthe periphery of the old sanctuary without obtaining orders from the court.

"The State Government shall constitute a committee headed by a retiredjudge of the Gujarat High Court and consisting of experts in the fields ofhydrology, soil erosion and other related disciplines to make acomprehensive study of the relevant environmental aspect,'' Justice S NPhukan said in their recent order.

On April 14, 1981, the State Government through a notification declared apart of the forest area in Lukhphat taluka of Kutch district as a `wild lifesanctuary' having a total area of 765.79 o an area of 94.87 sq km. On apetition, the high court had quashed both these notification, thus, revivingthe 1981 notification.

The state legislature on July 27, 1995 passed a resolution to reduce thesanctuary limit to 444.23 sq km and make the area of 321.56 sq km rich withminerals like limestone, lignite, bauxite and bentonite, available for thedevelopment of the backward area of Kutch district. The government on August9, 1995 gave effect to the resolution.

The same was again challenged by Consumer Education and Research Society butthe high court dismissed the petition saying the State Government has takeneffective steps not to affect the wildlife.

While hearing appeal against the high court order, the Supreme Court hadallowed limited mining of limestone but had sought a bank guarantee of Rs 50lakh for the purpose of compensating damage to the disputed area.

Rejecting the petitioner's plea to quash the 1995 notification, JusticeNanavati said, "It will not be proper to invalidate the resolution of thestate legislature on such a ground when we find that it took the decisionafter duly deliberating upon material which was available with it and didnot think it necessary to call for further information.