/2022 INSC 0051/ NON­REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION  I.A.   Nos.   154740­154741   of   2021,   153531­153532   of 2021, 165173 of 2021, 160138 of 2021, 160139 of 2021, 160142 of 2021 and 163177 of 2021 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3661­3662 OF 2020 THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS       ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS        ...RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R 1. All   these   I.As   arise   out   of   the   directions   issued   by   this Court   vide   order   dated   10 th   November   2021   in   Civil   Appeal Nos. 3661­3662 of 2020. 2. The   State   of   Bihar   had   approached   this   Court challenging the order dated 14 th  October 2020, passed by the National   Green   Tribunal,   Principal   Bench,   New   Delhi 1 (hereinafter   referred   to   as   “the   Tribunal”)   in   O.A.   No. 40/2020/EZ   with   O.A.   No.   57/2020/EZ,   thereby   issuing various directions.  This Court after taking into consideration various   aspects,   including   the   necessity   to   curb   illegal mining  activities and  the  necessity  to permit  legal  mining  in the interregnum till the other directions issued by this Court are complied with, had issued the  following  directions dated 10 th  November 2021: “ 14. We therefore find it appropriate to substitute the directions issued by the Tribunal vide judgment and   order   dated   14 th   October   2020,   with   the following directions:­ (i) The   exercise   of   preparation   of   DSR   for the  purpose  of  mining  in   the  State  of  Bihar in   all   the   districts   shall   be   undertaken afresh.    The draft DSRs shall be prepared by the   sub­divisional   committees   consisting   of the Sub­Divisional Magistrate, Officers from Irrigation   Department,   State   Pollution Control   Board   or   Committee,   Forest Department,   Geological   or   mining   officer. The same shall be prepared by undertaking site   visits   and   also   by   using   modern technology.   The   said   draft   DSRs   shall   be prepared   within   a   period   of   6   weeks   from the date of this order.     After the draft DSRs 2 are   prepared,   the   District   Magistrate   of   the concerned   District   shall   forward   the   same for   examination   and   evaluation   by   the SEAC.     The   same   shall   be   examined   by   the SEAC   within   a   period   of   6   weeks   and   its report   shall   be   forwarded   to   the   SEIAA within   the  aforesaid  period  of  6  weeks  from the   receipt   of   it.     The   SEIAA   will   thereafter consider the grant of approval to such DSRs within   a   period   of   6   weeks   from   the   receipt thereon; (ii) Needless   to   state   that   while   preparing DSRs   and   the   appraisal   thereof   by   SEAC and   SEIAA,   it   should   be   ensured   that   a strict   adherence   to   the   procedure   and parameters   laid   down   in   the   policy   of January 2020 should be followed; (iii) Until   further   orders,   we   permit   the State   Government   to   carry   on   mining activities   through   Bihar   State   Mining Corporation   for   which   it   may   employ   the services   of   the   contractors.   However,   while doing so, the State Government shall ensure that   all   environmental   concerns   are   taken care   of   and   no   damage   is   caused   to   the environment.” The matter was directed to be listed after 20 weeks. I.A. Nos. 154740­154741 of 2021  3 3. The present I.As have been filed being aggrieved by the cancellation of Letter of Intent (hereinafter referred to as the “LoI”)   dated   21 st   January   2020,   issued   in   favour   of   the applicant. The applicant also apprehended that in view of the order   dated   10 th   November   2021   passed   by   this   Court   with respect   to   Banka   District,   the   State   Government   may   also issue   short   Notice   Inviting   Tender   (hereinafter   referred  to   as the   “NIT”)   with   respect   to   Kishanganj   District.     After   the present I.As were filed, NIT has also been issued in respect of sand ghats in Kishanganj District on 2 nd  December 2021.  4. Shri   Mukul   Rohatgi,   learned   Senior   Counsel   appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that the applicant was a successful   bidder   in   the   auction   held   for   the   Kishanganj District   and   as   such,   the   action   of   the   respondent   in cancelling   the   LoI   and   issuing   fresh   NIT   for   Kishanganj District   is   not   sustainable   in   law.     It   is   submitted   that   the offer   of   the   applicant   was   for   a   much   higher   amount   as compared to the offer received by the respondent­Bihar State Mining   Corporation   (hereinafter   referred   to   as   the “Corporation”)   for   Kishanganj   District.     He   therefore 4 submitted   that   it   is   in   the   interest   of   justice   that   the applicant may be permitted to carry out the mining activities in the Kishanganj District. I.A. Nos. 153531­153532 of 2021 5. In the present I.As, the applicant claimed that it was a successful   bidder   for   auction   of   sand   ghats   in   respect   of Banka   District   for   the   period   from   2015   to   2019.     It   is   the case of the applicant that it had been granted extension after the   year   2019   from   time   to   time   and   the   last   of   such extensions   was   granted   till   31 st   March   2022.     The   applicant apprehended   that   in   pursuance   to   the   order   dated   10 th November   2021   passed   by   this   Court,   NIT   would   also   be issued in respect of Banka District.   During the pendency of these I.As, NIT in respect of sand ghats in Banka District has been issued by the Corporation on 2 nd  December 2021. 6. We   have   heard   Shri   Narender   Hooda,   learned   Senior Counsel   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   applicant   in   the   said application.   7. Shri  Hooda  submitted that  since the  applicant was  the highest   bidder   in   the   auction   conducted   for   the   period   from 5 2015   to   2019   and   since   thereafter,   the   applicant   had   been granted   extensions,   he   is   entitled   to   carry   out   the   mining activities at least till 31 st   March 2022.   He further submitted that   the   amount   which   the   respondent­Corporation   would receive for the sand ghats in pursuance to the NIT dated 2 nd December 2021, is much less than the one the applicant has offered   and   therefore,   it   is   in   the   interest   of   justice   that   the applicant be permitted to continue with the mining activities at least till 31 st  March 2022. I.A. No. 165173 of 2021 8. The   grievance   of   the   present   applicant   is   somewhat similar to the grievance of the applicant in I.A. Nos. 154740­ 154741   of   2021.     Here   again,   it   is   the   contention   of   the applicant   that   it   was   a   successful   bidder   in   respect   of   the sand ghats in the Jamui District in the bids conducted in the year   2019.    It  is  therefore  submitted that  the  impugned  NIT dated   15 th   November   2021   issued   by   the   Corporation prejudicially affects the interest of the applicant.   9. We have heard Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel in support of the said application.   Shri Bhushan submitted 6 that   the   applicant   was   a   successful   bidder   in   the   bids conducted in the year 2019 and he is entitled to be appointed as a contractor or in the alternative at least he be granted a right to match the highest bidder along with the right of first refusal. I.A. Nos. 160138, 160139 and 160142 of 2021 10. The  grievance  of  the  present  applicant   is  similar  to   the grievance   of   the   applicant   in   I.A.   Nos.   153531­153532   of 2021.   It is the case of the applicant that it was a successful bidder for  the period from  2015 to 2019 at Nawada District. Thereafter, the applicant was granted extensions from time to time   and   the   last   of   such   extensions   was   granted   till   31 st March 2022.   11. Shri C.A. Sundaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing on   behalf   of   the   applicant   submitted   that   as   such,   the applicant would be entitled to carry out the mining activities till 31 st  March 2022. I.A. No. 163177 of 2021. 7 12. In   the   present   application,   it   has   been   submitted   on behalf   of   the   applicant   that   the   mining   activities   which   are being carried out by the Corporation are without the grant of Environmental   Clearance.     It   is   submitted   that   the   very purpose for which the order was passed by the Tribunal and modified   by   this   Court,   was   to   ensure   that   the   environment is   not   damaged   on   account   of   rampant   mining   activities without   the   grant   of   Environmental   Clearance   by   the Competent Authority.  It is therefore submitted that the NITs dated 15 th   November 2021 and 2 nd   December 2021 are silent about the environmental aspects and therefore, the action of the   respondent­Corporation   in   issuing   NITs   amounts   to contempt of this Court. 13. Shri   Atmaram   Nadkarni,   learned   Senior   Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant­State of Bihar submitted that the NITs in question were issued for a limited period in view   of   the   order   passed   by   this   Court   dated   10 th   November 2021.     He   submitted   that   the   rest   of   the   directions   as   are issued   by   this   Court   with   regard   to   preparation   of   draft District Survey Report (hereinafter referred to as “DSR”) and 8 consideration   of   the   same   by   State   Expert   Appraisal Committee   (hereinafter   referred   to   as   “SEAC”)   and   State Environment   Impact   Assessment   Authority   (hereinafter referred   to   as   “SEIAA”)   are   under   process.     He   further submitted   that   in   view   of   the   permission   granted   by   this Court vide order dated 10 th   November 2021, the Corporation is   employing   the   services   of   the   contractor   for   the   limited period.  He submitted that after the directions issued by this Court   are   complied   with,   a   fresh   process   for   allotment   of sand ghats in accordance with law would be initiated subject to the orders of this Court.   He further submitted that while permitting   the   mining   activities   through   the   services   of   the contractor,   the   Corporation   is   ensuring   that   no   damage   is caused to environment by such activities. 14. We   had   issued   the   directions   vide   order   dated   10 th November   2021   in   the   peculiar   facts   and   circumstances   of the   matter.     We   had   noticed   that   unless   the   detailed   DSRs are   prepared   by   the   Sub­Divisional   Committees   by undertaking site visits and using the modern technology and unless   the   same   are   examined   by   SEAC   and   SEIAA,   it   will 9 not   be   appropriate   to   carry   out   the   mining   activities. However, we had also noticed that if there is a ban on mining activities,   apart   from   it   leading   to   illegal   sand   mining, criminalization   and   clashes   between   the   sand   mafias,   it would also cause huge loss to the public exchequer.  We had noticed   that   sand   is   also   required   for  construction  of   public infrastructural   projects   as   well   as   public   and   private construction activities. 15. Taking   into   consideration   these   aspects   of   the   matter, we   had   issued   directions   so   that   the   Sub­Divisional Committees,   the   SEAC   and   SEIAA   act   within   the   stipulated time periods.  We had granted 6 weeks’ time at each level and had directed the matter to be kept after 20 weeks.   However noticing,   that   during   the   said   period,   it   was   necessary   to permit   the   mining   activities   so   as   to   prevent   illegal   mining and   also   to   prevent   loss   to   the   public   exchequer,   we   had permitted the Corporation to  carry  out  the mining  activities, and   further   to   employ   the   services   of   the   contractor. However,   while   doing   so,   we   had   directed   the   State Government   to   ensure   that   all   environmental   concerns   are 10 taken care of and no damage is caused to the environment. It could   thus   be   seen   that   this   was   only   a   stop   gap arrangement. 16. A   perusal   of   the   NITs   in   question,   issued   by   the Corporation   would   reveal   that   the   Corporation   has specifically   referred   to   the   order   dated   10 th   November   2021, passed   by   this   Court   and   has   also   specified   that   the operation period of sand ghats will only  be up to 31 st   March 2022,  and   subject  to   further   orders  passed  by   this  Court   in the present proceedings.   17. Insofar as the applicants in I.A. Nos. 153531­153532 of 2021 and I.A. Nos.160138, 160139 and 160142 of 2021, who claim to have a vested right in view of the extensions granted in   their   favour   are   concerned,   we   see   no   merit   in   these applications.   Though   they   were   successful   in   the   bidding process   held   in   the   year   2015,   which   was   extended   up   to 2019   and   thereafter,   they   were   only   continuing   under   the extensions granted.   18. Insofar   as   the   other   applicants   in   I.A.   Nos.154740­ 154741   of   2021   and   I.A.   No.165173   of   2021   are   concerned, 11 though   they   were   successful   bidders   in   the   tender   process conducted   in   the   year   2019,   in   view   of   the   order   passed   by the Tribunal dated 14 th  October 2020, which was modified by this   Court   vide   order   dated   10 th   November   2021,   they   also cannot claim a vested right to do the mining activities.   19. Taking   into   consideration   the   peculiar   facts   and circumstances   in   which   we   had   passed   the   order,   we   find that   entertaining   any   of   such   applications   would   result   in further   complications.     In   any   case   after   our   directions issued   on   10 th   November   2021   are   complied   with,   we   will take   a   final   look   of   the   matter   in   the   last   week   of   March, 2022.   The NITs issued by the Corporation for mining, cover the period only up to 31 st   March 2022.   We are therefore not inclined to entertain the aforesaid four I.As. 20. Insofar   as   the   I.A.   No.   163177   of   2021,   filed   by   the applicant   alleging   contempt   of   this   Court’s   order   dated   10 th November   2021   is   concerned,   we   have   already   directed   the State   of   Bihar   to   ensure   that   while   carrying   out   the   mining activities, it shall ensure that all environmental concerns are taken   care   of   and   no   damage   is   caused   to   the   environment. 12 We   remind   the   State   Government   of   the   said   directions   and direct it to ensure that the said directions are complied with scrupulously. 21. In   that   view   of   the   matter,   I.A.   Nos.   154740­154741   of 2021,   153531­153532   of   2021,   160138   of   2021,   160139   of 2021, 160142 of 2021 and 165173 of 2021 are rejected.   22. I.A.   No.   163177   of   2021   is   disposed   of   in   terms   of paragraph (20) of this order. ……....….......................J. [L. NAGESWARA RAO] ..…....….......................J.       [B.R. GAVAI] NEW DELHI; JANUARY 18, 2022. 13