central empowered committee report (i) of the cec in writ petition
central empowered committee report (i) of the cec in writ petition central empowered committee report (i) of the cec in writ petition
the purported ground that the Indian Bureau of Mines and the Survey of India are not cooperating to ensure early completion of the survey work. 5. The CEC is of the view that the mining lease holders who were found to be involved in illegal mining / encroachment outside their mining lease areas should not have been allowed to continue mining. If there was any doubt about the extent of illegality committed by them, in such cases the extent of encroachment and illegal mining should have been determined expeditiously. Exemplary punitive action should have been taken against the lease holders involved in illegal mining and encroachment. In stead, relying upon the Hon’ble High Court orders, which have been given on the basis of the statements made by the State of Karnataka, the mining operations have been allowed to continue unabated and seized vehicles, tools and machinery have been returned to the erring lease holders. No effective steps have been taken to verify the extent of illegal mining. Effective follow-up action on the Report of the Lokayukta has not been taken. This is a most undesirable state of affairs particularly considering that illegal mining has been taking place on a large scale in Karnataka. The inaction on the part of the State Government has further encouraged illegal mining in the State. 76
6. The findings of the Lokayukta, Karnataka are based on the detailed survey done in the field and by superimposing the lease boundaries on the satellite imageries. Copies of the survey sketch along with the satellite imageries in respect of the mining lease of M/s V.S. Lad & Sons – one of the cases dealt with in the Report of the Lokayukta, Karnataka are collectively enclosed at ANNEXURE R-56 (COLLY) to this Report. Out of the seven cases wherein re- survey has so far been done, the encroachments / illegal mining have been confirmed in six cases. Only in one case, which otherwise involved a very small area under encroachment / illegal mining, no encroachment was found. The CEC is of the view that the process followed by the Lokayukta, Karnataka for determining the area under illegal mining / encroachment is prima facie sound and reliable. Because of inaction of the State of Karnataka against the defaulting lease holders no effective action for the illegality committed by them has been taken and the lease holders have remained unpunished. As observed during the site visit, in a number of cases, the extent of illegal mining has increased manifold. 7. In the above background, following recommendations are made for the consideration of this Hon’ble Court: 77
- Page 25 and 26: merger Agreement inter alia conferr
- Page 27 and 28: the details of the areas notified u
- Page 29 and 30: 8. Large tracts of areas in Karnata
- Page 31 and 32: 10. From the above it may be seen t
- Page 33 and 34: 5. 2646 M/s Shiva Vilas Trust 6. Sh
- Page 35 and 36: non-forest land. Falls in de-reserv
- Page 37 and 38: the Divisional Forest Officer. A st
- Page 39 and 40: have been provided by the Karnataka
- Page 41 and 42: favour of M/s Shiva Vilas Trust, wh
- Page 43 and 44: Hon’ble Karnataka High Court are
- Page 45 and 46: sanctioned lease area, the Lokayukt
- Page 47 and 48: notification issued under Section 4
- Page 49 and 50: directed to be undertaken in a time
- Page 51 and 52: y them because of mining leases ill
- Page 53 and 54: However, the formal approval under
- Page 55 and 56: 16.3.2011 (enclosed at ANNEXURE-R-4
- Page 57 and 58: 7. There have been consistent compl
- Page 59 and 60: demarcated the mining lease of M/s.
- Page 61 and 62: satellite imageries. During the sit
- Page 63 and 64: y the S.B. Minerals, as seen in the
- Page 65 and 66: considered view that the joint surv
- Page 67 and 68: 67 man’s land available for illeg
- Page 69 and 70: 69 Lokayukta, Karnataka, report of
- Page 71 and 72: CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE REPORT
- Page 73 and 74: prosecute the FIR dated 3.2.2009 an
- Page 75: 3. Similar directions have been pas
- Page 79 and 80: illegality in respect of mining lea
- Page 81 and 82: CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE REPORT
- Page 83 and 84: hectares of already broken up fores
- Page 85 and 86: (iii) Deputy Conservator of Forests
- Page 87 and 88: the leased out area which is not di
- Page 89 and 90: compliance of the directions of the
- Page 91 and 92: Report. A copy of the note of the P
- Page 93 and 94: viii) the case involved wilful viol
- Page 95 and 96: the Conservator of Forest, Bellary
- Page 97 and 98: egard to the iron ore seized by the
6. The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Lokayukta, Karnataka are based on<br />
<strong>the</strong> detailed survey done <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> field and by superimpos<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>the</strong> lease boundaries on <strong>the</strong> satellite imageries. Copies <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> survey sketch along with <strong>the</strong> satellite imageries <strong>in</strong><br />
respect <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g lease <strong>of</strong> M/s V.S. Lad & Sons – one <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> cases dealt with <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Report <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Lokayukta,<br />
Karnataka are collectively enclosed at ANNEXURE R-56<br />
(COLLY) to this Report. Out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> seven cases where<strong>in</strong> re-<br />
survey has so far been done, <strong>the</strong> encroachments / illegal<br />
m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g have been confirmed <strong>in</strong> six cases. Only <strong>in</strong> one case,<br />
which o<strong>the</strong>rwise <strong>in</strong>volved a very small area under<br />
encroachment / illegal m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, no encroachment was found.<br />
The CEC is <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> view that <strong>the</strong> process followed by <strong>the</strong><br />
Lokayukta, Karnataka for determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> area under illegal<br />
m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g / encroachment is prima facie sound and reliable.<br />
Because <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>action <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> State <strong>of</strong> Karnataka aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong><br />
default<strong>in</strong>g lease holders no effective action for <strong>the</strong> illegality<br />
committed by <strong>the</strong>m has been taken and <strong>the</strong> lease holders<br />
have rema<strong>in</strong>ed unpunished. As observed dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> site<br />
visit, <strong>in</strong> a number <strong>of</strong> cases, <strong>the</strong> extent <strong>of</strong> illegal m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g has<br />
<strong>in</strong>creased manifold.<br />
7. In <strong>the</strong> above background, follow<strong>in</strong>g recommendations<br />
are made for <strong>the</strong> consideration <strong>of</strong> this Hon’ble Court:<br />
77
Change language