Karnataka High Court upholds government decision to suspend quarry leases within 1 km of Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary

The Karnataka High Court has upheld a government order dated September 29, 2022, suspending the leases of fourteen quarries within a one-kilometer radius of the Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary.

A bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by SR Bellary and others against the resolution passed by the District Task Force Committee (Mines) of Gadag district. It said:

“Kappatgudda Wildlife Sanctuary is a declared sanctuary and the one kilometer distance has to be maintained. It is a restricted area where no mining activities are allowed. It is also to be noted that the protection of one kilometer from the sanctuary is done regardless of the notification as an ecologically sensitive zone.”

One of the applicants argued that he was granted a licence for ordinary building stone quarrying on 3 acres of land in Shirahatti village, Shirahatti Taluk, Gadag district for a period of twenty years from May 10, 2017. The licence was issued after an environmental impact assessment.

In 2019, the defendant authorities issued a notification declaring Kappathgudda Reserve Forest in Kappathgudda as a wildlife sanctuary. The plaintiffs sought to state that the ecologically sensitive zone was not notified and that the notification was issued without jurisdiction.

The respondents submitted that the guidelines were issued by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests on May 6, 2022. Paragraph 1.6 thereof refers to taking up any activity in the Eco-Sensitive Zone, provided it is notified or is within 10 kilometres from the boundary of the National Parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries, unless prior approval is obtained from the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) or the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (SCNBWL).

The court observed that the Government of Karnataka has identified six ecologically sensitive zones around the sanctuary vide a notification dated March 1, 2024. It then referred to the Supreme Court judgment in TN Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India and the High Court Division decision in Sri Sardar Ahmed HA v. State of Karnataka, Department of Commerce and Industry and Others, which considered Rule 32(1) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994, which prohibits mining activities in ecologically sensitive zones or one kilometre from the boundary of the national park and sanctuary.

The court said:The ban on operating quarries within a radius of one kilometre from the boundary of the National Park or Wildlife Sanctuary is no longer valid and the Supreme Court has issued clear directions prohibiting operations within the said radius. The establishment, operation and use of the quarries must be carried out at a minimum distance of one kilometre from the designated National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.”

It was subsequently found that the quarry leases of all the applicants were within one kilometre of the Kappatgudda Wildlife Sanctuary boundary and, therefore, their operations could not have been approved and would face suspension or cessation of operations.

Appearing: Senior Advocate GS Kannur a/w Advocate PM Siddamallappa and Advocate K.Srikanth Patil for the petitioners.

AGA SS Mahendra for the respondents.

Citation number: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 280

Case Title: SR Bellary & State of Karnataka & Others

Case number: WRITTEN PETITION NO. 25653/2022 C/W 25654/2022, 25655/2022, 25660/2022, 25680/2022, 12221/2023, 12229/2023, 17716/2023 AND 17912/2023

Click here to read/download the order