Guwahati: In a stern rebuke, the illegal sand mining in the Kaldiya River in Bajali district. The tribunal, on May 21, 2025, condemned the Directorate’s conduct as “seriously condemnable” and imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 for the delay.
The ongoing legal battle, initiated by Arup Jyoti Das & others through an Original Application (No. 196/2024/EZ), stems from allegations of widespread environmental violations, including illegal sand mining within 200 meters of a concrete bridge using JCB excavators, in violation of the Sand Mining Guidelines of 2016 and the Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
They alleged that the mining activities had caused damage to the riverbed, roads, and culverts of the area and also claimed that the project proponent, despite an approved permit for ordinary clay mining, was illegally engaged in sand mining activities.
During the recent hearing, the bench comprising Justice Sudhir Agarwal, Judicial Member, and Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, Expert Member, expressed dismay that the Assam Directorate of Geology & Mining, had not filed its counter-affidavit despite multiple opportunities.
An order dated March 3, 2025, had specifically granted three weeks’ further time for the Directorate to detail actions taken against illegal miners and the computation and recovery of environmental compensation. However, no response has been filed to date.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
“Conduct of respondent 3 ( Directorate of Geology & Mining) in not filing reply despite repeated opportunities, is seriously condemnable,” stated the NGT order.
Granting a “last opportunity” in the interest of justice, the tribunal allowed one month’s time for the Directorate to file its counter-affidavit, subject to the aforementioned cost.
The t Committee Report, which was submitted earlier, has already indicated “several violations on the part of project proponents.”
However, the tribunal noted that the Assam State Pollution Control Board (yet to be explicitly identified in the available documents but likely another governmental or regulatory body) had not provided any information regarding actions taken, particularly concerning the imposition of environmental compensation.
The Assam State Pollution Control Board has also been granted one month to file its reply, clearly outlining the actions taken against the project proponent for environmental law violations.
The case is now listed for further hearing on August 5, 2025.
The original application had prompted the NGT to constitute a committee for site inspection and a fact-finding report, comprising a senior scientist from the Assam State Pollution Control Board and a representative from the Bajali district istration.
The tribunal had also issued notices to various stakeholders, including the State of Assam, SEIAA, Assam State Pollution Control Board, MoEF&CC, and the project proponent, Kishor Kalita, seeking their responses.
