Large Scale Illegal mining and other Major violations – Tamilnadu Govt., determine the mining lease Granted to Southern Enterprises which belongs to Dayadevadas, who claim as President of Federation of Indian Placer Mineral Industries, a Company.

****

Thiru.Dayadevadas who is close associate with Former Central Minister Mr.Dhanuskodi Athithan, who make lot of complaints against all the rare mineral mining lessees in Tamilnadu along with V.Sundaram, a Retd.IAS officer. As per the order of the Honourable High Court, a team of officials, inspected Dayadevadas mining lease areas and found large scale Illegal mining and serious violations in terms of Mining and Environmental laws. The Government issued show cause notice against which this illegal miner approach the Hon’ble High Court. The High Court dismiss his writ petition as well as his review petition. Meantime, Tamilnadu Government determine the mining lease granted to Southern Enterprises in Sittilarai and Thumbalam villages of Musiri Taluk vide G.O.(Ms).No. 8 Industries (MMD.1) Department dated 01.02.2013. 

GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

ABSTRACT

Mines and Minerals – Major minerals – Trichirappalli District – Mining Lease granted to Tvl. Southern Enterprises in Government poramboke lands in S.F.Nos 31,206,207 etc., of Sittalarai and Thumbalam villages, Musiri Taluk Trichirappalli District – Over an extent of 13.71.5 hectares – Orders of Madurai bench of Honourable High Court In W.P.MD.No.175/2010- dated 09-02-2010 Illegal mining and other major violations committed – Determination of mining lease – orders – Issued.

—————————————————————————————————————-

Industries (MMD1) Department

G.O.(Ms)No.8                                                                                    Dated : 01.02.2013

                                                                                                            Read

1. G.O.(3D) No.75 Industries Department dated 01.08.2005
2. Madurai bench of Honourable Madras High court Order dated 09.02.2010 in W.P (MD). No. 175/2010
3. D.O.Letter No.2711/MMD.1/2010 – 1 dated 19.02.2010 of the Principal Secretary to Government, Chennai.
4. Letter Rc (A).No.1174/ 2009 dated 19.09.2011 of the District Collector , Trichirappalli with enclosures.
5. Government Lr.No.17407/MMD.1/2011 Dated . 30.09.2011
6. Letter Rc. No. 14462/MM7/2007 dated 10.10.2011 of Commissioner of Geology and Mining with enclosures.
7. Government letter No, 17407/MMD.1/2011/Industries (MMD.1) Dept dated 14.11.2011.
8. From Tvl .Southern Enterprises letter dated 19.12.2011, 27.01.2012,23.02.2012, 16.01.2013 and 18.01.2013

ORDER :

In the Government Order First read above, a mining lease was granted to Tvl.Southern Enterprises, for mining Garnet Sand from Goverment poramboke landsover an extent of 13.71.5 hectares in S.F.Nos 31 & 206, 207, etc. of Sittalaraiand Tumbalam villages , Musiri Taluk, Trichirappalli district for a peroid of twenty years.

2.   While said mining lease has been under operation of the lease company, one Thiri.R.Appu Nadesan , had submitted representations dated 10.11.2007 , 21.07.2008,and 6.3.2010 requested the Goverment , Industries Department to initiate action against Tvl. Southern Enterprises and Indian Garnet Sand Co. Pvt Ltd not complying with the conditions imposed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests The representations were forwarded to CGM by the Government Lr.NO. 21896/MMA.2/2007 dated 22.01.2008 for taking appropriate action and for sending specific remarks to Government. Similarly the subsequent representation received from Thiru. R. Appu Nadesan was also forwarded by the Government vide letter No. 13334/MMA.2/2008-1 dated19.12.2008.

3. Thereafter, Thiru. R. Appu Nadesan filed a writ petition in W.P.No. 175/2010 in the Madurai bench of Honourable Madras High Court prayed to consider the dispose of his representation dated 21.012.2008. The Madurai bench of the Honourable Madras High court has ordered as follows:

“According to the petitioner, several leases have been granted in AnjalamVillage in Musiri Taluk for  mining and though the lease deed contains specific conditions which relate to the environmental protection, the authorities have not ensured that these conditions are adhered to. The petitioner had given a representation dated 21.12.2008. In this, his request was a team of officials may be deputed to inspect the mining leases area to see whether the above conditions were fulfilled and whether the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act were fulfilled. There has been no response.

The Madurai bench of the Honourable Madras High Court has directed the Secretary to Government, Industries department as follows:

“Interim inspection reports shall be filed by the respondent with the assistance of pollution control board and the Department of Environment after inspecting the sites and after giving due notice to the companies concerned as well as to the petitioner. The District Collector has constituted a team and the said team of officials have inspected the few areas on 06.03.2010. An interim report for few areas was furnished by the District Collector in Lr. No. 1174/2009 dt. 07.03.2010 to the Government wherein various violations committed by the lessee companies have been reported.

4. Thiru. R. Appu Nadesan once again submitted a  representation dated 07.07.2011 to take appropriate action on the subject matter on the points raised in his representation. This representation was also forwarded to the District Collector by CGM letter dated 27.07.2011 requesting the District Collector to take appropriate action as directed by the Honourable High court ad the Government and send a consolidated action taken report on the points raised in various representation of Thiru. R. Appu Nadesan.

5. Consequently, the District Collector, Thiruchirapalli has constituted a team inducting the district level department officials of 1) The Revenue Divisional Officer, Musiri, Tiruchirapalli district 2) The Assistant director of Geology and Mining, Tiruchirapalli, 3) The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Tiruchirapalli 4) The Assistant Executive Engineer, PWD-WRO, Thuraiyur, 5) The Assistant Director, Agriculture Department, Thottiam, 6) The Assistant Director, Agriculture Department, Thatheingarpettai, 7) The Assistant Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Thottiam, 8) The District Forest Officer, Tiruchirapalli division and 9) The Assistant Director, Survey Department, Tiruchirapalli and instructed them to inspect the mining lease areas and the Factories of the lessee companies from 19.08.2011 to 22.08.2011 with prior intimation given to the petitioner as well as the lessee companies involved in the subject matter. The District Collector has furnished a comprehensive report based on the various inputs given by the various district level department officials who were part of the inspecting team.

6. The detailed fact finding report as furnished by the District Collector and the remarks of the Commissioner of Geology and Mining reveaedl large quantity of illegal mining, transportation and storage of both processed Garnet, semi processed Garnet bearing sand and unprocessed Garnet bearing sand as well without any valid transport permit. In addition to the above illegal mining and transportation the following violations. have also been reported in the mining lease areas of the lessee company.

7. As per the District Collector’s report, in respect of G.O.(3D) No. 75 dt.1.8.2005, Tvl. Southern Enterprises, have committed the following.

1. Violation of rule 22A of MC Rules, 1960,

2. Violation of section 4(1) of MMDR Act, 1957

3. Violation of Section 4(1A) of MMDR Act 1957

4. All the above violations are punishable offence under section

21(1) of MMDR Act 1957.

5. Violation of lease granting order condition

6. Violation of condition of MoEF  Clearance

7.  Violation of rule 27(1) (K) of MC Rules, 1960

8. Violation of rule 27(1) (i) and rule 27(1) (j) and rule 27(1)(l) of MC Rules 1960

9. Violation of rule 27(4) of MC Rules 1960

8. As per the environmental clearance letter issued by Government, of India in letter  No. J/11015/3/2005-IA-II(M) dated 26.5.2005 the MoEF has accorded environmental clearance to the lessee company for an annual production capacity of 6300 Ton per annum working in open cast by manual method by way of scooping the raw garnet sand with shovel and blades without using any machinery. Drilling and blasting is not involved. Envisaged rated capacity of the mine is 6300 TPA (525 TPM) . Working depth is about 30cm. As per condition No. 2 of general condition no change in the calendar plan including excavation and quantum of garnet sand should be made. whereas, in this case the lessee company thus violated all the above conditions as the mining activity is more than 3 meter depth instead of 30 cm and the quantity also has increased and have violated not only the conditions imposed by MoEF,  but also violated the provisions of MMDR Act, 1957 and MC Rules, 1960 mentioned supra.

9.      Common Violations committed by Tvl. Southern Enterprises, in the lease hold areas granted in favour of in respect of no fulfilment of the MMDR Act, 1957 and the MC Rules, 1960.

No weigh bridge is available in the lease hold area.

1. No name board and boundary stone erected in the lease hold area which is a violation of the rule 27(1)(g) of MCR 1960.
2. The road side river banks, check dams all have been damaged because of your indiscriminate mining which is a violation of the rule 27(1)(h) and 27(1)(k) of MCR 1960
3. Did not keep and produce accounts showing the quantity of all minerals obtained and despatched from the mine site, etc which is a violation of the rule 27(1)(i) of MCR 1960
4. Did not produce the records which is a violation of the rule 27(1) (j) of MCR 1960.
5. Did not allow the officers of the State Government to enter upon and inspect your leasehold area which is a violation of rule 27(1)(l) of MCR 1960.
6. The District Collector, Trichirapalli has specifically reported that your employees of the lessee companies prevented the Revenue Divisional Officer and other District officials of the inspecting team from enter upon and inspecting your lease hold areas and accordingly your act has attracted punishment to b e initiated against under rule 27(4) of MC Rules 1960. The Commissioner of Geology and Mining has also endorsed the same.
7. Hence it has been decided to take action under Rule 27(4) of MC Rules for determination of your above said lease and also forfeiture of the security deposit to the government under rule 27(4) of MC Rules, 1960.

10. Common Violations Committed by the lessee company with regard to fulfilment of Environmental clearance conditions:

i) No green belt development as per the EIA clearance your lease hold area.

ii) No check dam or siltation bonds constructed which is a violation of condition No. ii)

iii) Only two times per year monitoring of ground water level has been carried out instead of the stipulated four times per year.

iv) Suitable conservation measures to augment ground water resources in the area shall be planned and implemented in consultation with Regional Director, CGWB.

v) Suitable rain water harvesting measures on long term basis shall be  planned and implemented in consultation with Regional Director, CGWB.

vi) Environmental laboratory should be established with adequated number and type of pollution monitoring and analysing equipment in consultation with the State Pollution Control Board.

11.The following violations have also been reported by the District Collector, Tiruchirapalli and Commissioner of Geology and Mining:

i) According to rule 27(4) of the MCR, 1960, if the lessee does not allow entry or inspection under cause (i),(j), l of sub rule 91) the State Government shall give notice in writing to the lessee companies requiring them to show cause within such time as may be specified in the notice why the lease should not be determined and their security deposit forfeited and if the lessee companies fail to show cause within the above said time to the satisfaction of the State Government, the State Government may determine the lease and forfeit the whole or part of the security deposit.

ii) As per the District Collector’s report the lessee company had not produced the accounts and records as required under MCR Rules, 1960 and also the employees of lessee company prevented the inspecting officers entry and inspection of your lease hold areas.

(iii) The Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Water Resources organisation (WRO) Ariyaru Basin sub division, Thuraiyoor has reported that all the areas granted under lease are classified as odai and river poramboke. In the above said lease hold areas, the company was permitted to mine to a maximum depth of 30cm to 50cm whereas you have mined up to 300cm but mined under the Mathagu of PWD Eri. Hence the water could not flow into the Eri. likewise the two sides of the banks of Poolancheri have been excavated for taking garnet sand. Hence there is a possibility of damage being caused to the banks during flood season.

iv) The Public Works Deparment authority has further reported that in S.Nos. 145 and 102 of Poolancheri and Appananallur villages the check dam has been completely damaged because of your indiscirminate mining and in Thumbalam village since the entire quantity of sand has been excavated in S.Nos. 206 and 207. the course of flow water in the Odai has changed thereby affecting the nearby lands. The check dam in S,No. 206 has been damaged. In all the odai areas, some of the Vari banks have been damaged by the lessee companies. Hence the water resources of the nearby villages will be greatly affected. The Public Works Department authority has further suggested that suitable action has to be taken to prevent further Garnet sand mining in these areas granted in the above said Government order.

v) Based on the opinion of the Public Works Department and also of the District Collector, Tirchirapalli it has beeb decided to take action for termination of the leases so as to protect the water resources of the nearby village people.

vi) Since the company have violated the Acts and Rules stipulated for scientific mining and also the lease deed conditions, MoEF  conditions, etc based on the recommendation of the District Collector, Trichirapalli it has been decided to terminate the mining leases under the provisions of Section 4A of MMDR Act,  1957. Besides, the State Government is statutorily empowered to determine  the lease as laid down under rule 27(4) of MC Rules, 1960 for the violations pointed out by the District Collector as well as Commissioner of Geology and Mining. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred upon the State Government by the above said Rule it has been decided to terminate the mining leases on the ground of statutory violations committed by the lessee company.

12. In the light of various violations committed by the lessee company in the manner enumerated above the lessee company was show caused as to why the mining lease granted in G.O. (3D) No 75, dated 01.08.2005 for mining Garnet over an extent 13.71.5 hectares in S.F. Nos. 31& 206,207 etc. of Government Poramboke lands shittilarai and Tumbalam villages, Musiri Taluk, Trichirapalli district for a period of twenty years should not be determined and the security deposit should not be forfeited to government in addition to the action proposed to be taken under section 21(1) (5) and section 22 of MMDR Act 1957.

13. The copies of the District Collector’s report with enclosures and the letter to the Commissioner of Geology and Mining referred to above have been provided to the lessee company so as to facilitate and to prepare and present their view points. The lessee company was directed to furnish reply within 15 days from the date of receipt of this notice. The lessee company was informed that if no suitable reply is received within the stipulated period it will be construed that the company have no proper explanation to offer on the various violations committed by the lessee company and accordingly necessary orders will be passed strictly in accordance with law and also as per the relevant provisions of MMDR Act 1957 and the MCR, 1960 based on the reports received from the District Collector and the Commissioner of Geology and Mining.

14. Tvl. Southern Enterprises has submitted their written reply in the letters eighth read above. while furnishing the written reply for the violations illustrated in the show cause notice the said lessee company have among other things brought to the notice of the Government about the pending two writ petition filed by them before Madurai bench of the Honourable High Court, Madras seeking relief of quashing the said show –cause notice issued by the Government According to the said lessee company the matter is reported to be sub-judice.

15. After correspondences between the lessee company and the Government after the receipt of the written reply furnished by the said lessee company. Govt after careful consideration informed the lessee company that a personal hearing had been refixed on 18.01.2013 at 3 PM and intimated the same to the said company. since he had already sought the postponement of the date of hearing earlier.

16. In reply to the Government letter, the lessee company informed the Government of the pending Review application No.61/2011 in Writ Petition No.175/2010 and requested for postponement of the hearing till the disposal of the review application.

17. The Government , after ascertaining that no interim order or stay is pending in such cases, informed the company that the lessee company should appear for a personal hearing at 3PM on 18-01-2013 failing which the matter will be decided on merits on the basis of available records, after ascertaining from the Special Government Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High court that there is no interim direction or stay in the issue as on date.

18. Thiru. D.Dhayadevadas, Managing Partner of the lessee company accompanied by his Advocate appeared in person on 18-01-2013 before the Governmen, Industries Department and furnished their written reply individually wherein both of them of have not given any fresh points over and above what has been furnished in their written explanation dated 20.12.2012 .

19. The Special Government pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in his letter dated 10.01.2013 has informed the Government that related cases are ony in admission stage and not yet admitted and also there is no Department has also opined that since the related cases are only in admission stage and not yet admitted and also there is no interim orders or stay or injection against the Government. mere pendency of the aforesaid cases is not a bar to proceed further, subject to the outcome related cases in this matter.

20. The written explanation furnished by the lessee company in respect of various violations, non-fulfilment of the condition and other deficiencies pointed out in the show cause notice issued were carefully examined by the Government with reference to the relevant provisions of the Mines and Minerals Development Regulation Act,1957, Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 and the conditions stipulated in the approval letter of the Ministry of Mines and the clearance of Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India and decided that the explanations are devoid of merits. Besides the report of the District Collector regarding the indiscriminate unlawful mining of the lessee company causing extensive damage to the public property to the Odai and stream course endangering the neighbouring areas by way of flooding, depletion of water resources, agricultural operations and other environmental degradations has also put the Government in serious consideration of review of the mining lease granted to the said lessee company and also in the grounds of violations of governing Acts and Rules mentioned in paras 7 and 9 above by the lessee company.

21. Above all more importantly, the act of the representatives of the lessee company in not allowing entry and inspection of the officials of the Government conducted as per the provisions of clause (i) (j) or (l) of sub rule 1 of Rule 27 of the Mineral concession Rules, 1960 is viewed very seriously by the Government in terms of the provision of the Sub Rule 4 of the Rule 27 of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 which reads as follows:

If the lessee does not allow entry or inspection under clause (i)(j) o l sub rule (1) , the State Government shall give notice in writing to the lessee requiring him to show cause within such time as may be specified in the notice if the lessee fails to show cause within the aforesaid time to the satisfaction of the State Government, the State Government may determine the lease and forfeit the whole or part of the security deposit.

22. The government after careful examinations of all the grounds mentioned above and the recommendation of the District Collector, Tirchirapalli and commissioner of Geology and Mining and the opinion of special Government Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided to invoke the provisions of sub rule 4 of the Rule 27 of Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 and accordingly in exercise of the powers conferred in the said rule, hereby determine the mining lease granted in G.O.(3D) No. 75 Industries (MMA 2) department , dated 1.8.2005 to Tvl. Southern Enterprises for Garnet over and extent of 13.71.5 hectares in Government Poramboke lands bearing S.F.Nos.31,207,. etc in Sittalarai. and Thumbalam villages, Musiri Taluk, Trichirapalli district for twenty years with the forfeiture of security deposits connected therewith.

23. The District Collector, Trichirapalli and commissioner of Geology and Mining are instructed to take necessary follow up action in this regard.

(BY ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR)

                                                                                     N.S.PALANIAPPAN

                                                            PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

TO

The lessee Company,

The District Collector, Trichirapalli.

The Commissioner of Geology and Mining, Guindy,Chennai – 600032

Ind (OP.II Dept), Chennai -600 009

*********