Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others (1993)

Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others (1993) is a landmark Supreme Court judgment on environmental protection and illegal mining. The case arose from a public interest petition challenging mining activities in the Tiger Reserve and protected forest areas of Alwar, Rajasthan. 

The Court held that mining leases granted without prior approval of the Central Government under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 were illegal. It emphasised that the case concerned enforcement of existing environmental laws rather than balancing economic and ecological interests. The Court directed closure of illegal mines and reinforced strict compliance with forest and environmental protection laws.

Add LawBhoomi as your preferred source on Google.

Add Now →

Case Details

Facts of Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others Case

The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by Tarun Bharat Sangh, a voluntary organisation working for environmental protection. The organisation approached the Supreme Court alleging widespread illegal mining activities in the Alwar district of Rajasthan, particularly in areas declared as a Tiger Reserve.

The petitioner argued that the mining operations were being carried out in areas that had already received legal protection under different environmental and forest laws. These included declarations of the area as a tiger reserve, sanctuary, national park and protected forest under the applicable laws.

According to the petitioner, several notifications prohibited mining in these protected areas. Despite these restrictions, the State Government had granted hundreds of mining licences for extracting marble, dolomite and other minerals. It was alleged that these licences were contrary to law and caused serious damage to the environment and ecology of the region.

The petitioner requested the Supreme Court to stop all illegal mining activities in the interest of environmental protection, ecological balance and the rule of law.

Explore the latest legal opportunities for law students and lawyers.

Explore Opportunities →

Proceedings Before the Supreme Court

After considering the allegations, the Supreme Court issued notices to the State Government as well as the mine owners.

As an interim measure, the Court directed that no mining operations should continue in the protected area.

Recognising the need for an independent examination, the Court appointed a committee headed by a former Judge of the Rajasthan High Court. The committee was entrusted with ensuring compliance with the various environmental and forest laws applicable to the area. One of its primary responsibilities was to identify and demarcate the land declared as protected forest under the notification dated 1 January 1975 issued under Section 29 of the Rajasthan Forest Act.

Findings of the Committee

The committee carried out an extensive examination of official records and maps.

It compared the tracing maps supplied by the Forest Department with those maintained by the Revenue Department. After verifying the records and examining the relevant Khasra numbers mentioned in the notification, the committee identified the protected forest areas.

The committee concluded that the protected forest did not exist as one continuous block but consisted of several separate areas.

Its report revealed the following:

• 215 mines were located completely within the protected forest areas.
• 47 mines were situated partly inside and partly outside the protected forest.

There was no disagreement among the committee members regarding the location of the mines. The difference of opinion arose only on the question of whether mining operations should be stopped.

Learn at your own pace with LawBhoomi's recorded law courses.

View Recorded Courses →

The Chairman of the committee recommended immediate closure of all mining operations in the 215 mines situated entirely within the protected forest. He also recommended stopping mining within the protected portions of the remaining 47 mines.

Some senior State Government officials who were members of the committee suggested that instead of closing the mines, the State Government’s proposal to exclude the mining area from the protected forest should be considered.

Stand of the State Government

The State Government submitted that while granting mining leases, it was not aware that the concerned mines fell within the protected forest area.

According to the State Government, the certificates issued by the Forest Department indicated that the mines were outside the protected forest, and therefore the grants were made bona fide.

The State also informed the Court that it was prepared to comply with any direction issued by the Supreme Court. It stated that several mines had already been closed and expressed willingness to stop the remaining mining activities if directed.

The Government further proposed that approximately 5.02 square kilometres, including the mining area, should be removed from the protected forest. In return, it offered to provide an equal extent of land for inclusion as protected forest.

Stand of the Central Government

The Central Government informed the Supreme Court that the concerned area was governed by various environmental and forest laws, including:

• The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
• The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
• The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957

It stated that the Forest (Conservation) Act applied not only to reserved and protected forests but also to all areas recorded as forests in Government records.

Mining was a non-forest activity and therefore could not be undertaken without obtaining prior approval from the Central Government.

Explore practical law courses to build career-ready legal skills.

Explore Courses →

The Central Government further pointed out that a notification dated 7 May 1992 issued under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act prohibited mining in the relevant area without prior approval.

Since no such approval had been obtained for the mines in question, the mining operations were contrary to law.

Issues Before the Court

The Supreme Court in Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others considered the following principal issues:

• Whether mining operations carried out in the protected forest and Tiger Reserve areas were legally valid.
• Whether mining leases granted without prior approval of the Central Government violated the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
• Whether the committee’s report identifying the protected forest areas should be accepted.
• Whether mining could continue despite the notifications issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
• Whether the State Government’s proposal to substitute the protected forest land with another area should be accepted.

Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others Judgment of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court in Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others accepted the committee’s report and held that the identified mines were located within the protected forest areas as indicated in the report.

The Court observed that this was not a case where it was being asked to stop a lawful activity in the name of environmental protection.

Instead, the case concerned the enforcement of laws that had already been enacted by the Legislature for protecting forests and the environment.

The Court stated that once the Legislature had balanced the interests of economic development and environmental protection by enacting the relevant laws, the executive was bound to implement them faithfully.

It held that the executive had failed to discharge its legal duty by permitting mining activities that were prohibited under the existing statutory framework.

Court’s Reasoning in Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others

Enforcement of Existing Laws

The Supreme Court emphasised that the dispute was essentially about enforcing environmental laws rather than creating new restrictions.

Since the law already prohibited unauthorised mining in protected forest areas, there was no occasion for the Court to weigh economic interests against environmental concerns.

The responsibility of the Court was to ensure compliance with the law.

Validity of the Protected Forest Notification

The Court examined the notification issued under Section 29 of the Rajasthan Forest Act.

It held that the notification declaring the protected forest was valid and effective.

The Court also observed that Section 29 contemplates a single notification declaring an area as protected forest and that such notification was legally enforceable.

Acceptance of the Committee’s Report

The Court found no reason to reject the committee’s findings.

The committee had carried out an elaborate exercise using official records, Government maps and land details.

Since there was no disagreement regarding the identification of the mines and the protected forest boundaries, the Court accepted the report in its entirety.

The objections raised by the mine owners could not override the official records examined by the committee.

Applicability of the Forest (Conservation) Act

The Court held that once an area is declared as protected forest, it falls within the scope of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

Mining is a non-forest activity.

Accordingly, no mining lease could be granted or renewed within the protected forest without obtaining prior approval from the Central Government.

Since no such approval had been obtained, the mining leases were contrary to law.

Effect of the Environment (Protection) Act

The Court also examined the notification issued under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act on 7 May 1992.

The notification prohibited mining operations within the areas covered under Project Tiger unless prior approval of the Central Government had been obtained.

The Court observed that no such permission had been granted for the mines in question.

Therefore, the mining operations were also inconsistent with the Environment (Protection) Act.

Economic Considerations

The Court recognised that closing the mines would affect investment, industrial activity and employment.

However, it observed that such considerations could not legalise activities that were inherently illegal.

The Court held that illegal mining could not be permitted merely because its closure would have economic consequences.

Directions Issued by the Court

The Supreme Court in Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others issued several important directions.

These included:

• Mining activities in all mines situated entirely within the protected forest areas were required to stop.
• Mining operations falling within the protected portions of partly affected mines could not continue.
• The proposal of the Rajasthan Government to remove certain land from the protected forest was directed to be examined by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, after which further orders would be passed.
• Mines situated outside the protected forest but within the Tiger Reserve were permitted to continue operations for a period of four months.
• During this four-month period, the mine owners could apply to the Central Government for permission to continue mining.
• If permission was not obtained within the prescribed period, mining throughout the Tiger Reserve area was required to cease.

Conclusion

Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India and Others is a landmark decision that strengthened the enforcement of India’s forest and environmental laws. The Supreme Court held that mining operations carried out without the mandatory approval of the Central Government in protected forest and Tiger Reserve areas were illegal. While acknowledging the economic impact of closing the mines, the Court gave priority to the rule of law and statutory compliance.