The Union of India has informed the Supreme Court about its intention to introduce significant changes in the process followed by the District Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (DEIAA) and State Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (SEIAA) for granting environmental clearances.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice KV Viswanathan was hearing a civil appeal challenging an order from the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The order had disapproved of environmental clearances issued by DEIAA in specific cases instead of SEIAA.
Previously, the Supreme Court had directed state governments to establish SEIAAs within six weeks in regions where they were not yet formed.
Government’s Proposal for Changes
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, representing the Union, informed the court about the proposed modifications in the composition and functioning of SEIAAs. The government also plans to submit an affidavit detailing the following key changes:
- Adjustments in the threshold for environmental appraisals.
- Introduction of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for mining clusters within 5 hectares.
- Reallocation of mining clusters between 5-25 hectares to SEIAA instead of DEIAA.
Considering these proposed modifications, the Supreme Court has directed the Union Government to submit the detailed affidavit by February 24.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Criticizes Union for Non-Representation in West Bengal's Suit Against CBI's Powers
Supreme Court’s Observations
CJI Sanjiv Khanna emphasized the importance of equitable voting rights in the SEIAA while approving mining lease proposals:
"We are making it very clear, as far as the voting rights are concerned, when it comes to accepting or rejecting the proposal, the three members of yours will have two votes, you will not have the casting vote... as far as experts are concerned, they will have three votes, else they will be outnumbered."
He also pointed out that district-level officials, such as Deputy Commissioners or Sub-Divisional Magistrates, are unlikely to take decisions that conflict with those made by the District Collector, under whose authority they function.
To address this concern, ASG Bhati suggested appointing the Sub-Divisional Magistrate as the Member-Secretary without voting rights. She also clarified that SEIAA and the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC) would consist of separate experts and members.
The SEAC serves as an advisory body to SEIAA regarding environmental clearances. SEIAA makes the final decision based on SEAC’s recommendations.
The Supreme Court also discussed reducing the required work experience for expert members in the Appraisal Authority. CJI Sanjiv Khanna remarked:
"We will reduce the number of years prescribed over here. Instead of 15 years, we will make it 10 years, and instead of 10 years, we can make it 6 or 7 years."
Currently, expert members are required to have at least 15 years of field experience or an advanced degree with 10 years of relevant experience. However, moving forward, the selection process will be conducted through public advertisement, with the selection committee comprising:
- Chairperson of the State Pollution Control Board.
- The senior-most Forest Officer in the state.
- One expert member from SEAC nominated by SEAC.
ASG Bhati further informed the court about the revised composition of DEIAA, which is proposed to include:
- Chairman – Sub-Divisional Officer of the Forest Department.
- Member Secretary – Representative of the State Pollution Control Board/Committee.
- Four Expert Members.
The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on February 27.
Read Also:- Can Citizens Access Election Records? Supreme Court Reviews Rule Change Amid Transparency Concerns
Background of the Case
The Supreme Court is hearing a challenge by the Union against an order issued by the NGT on September 13, 2018. The NGT had directed the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change to revise its 2016 notification, which exempted regulatory clearances for mining leases covering 0 to 25 hectares.
The notifications under challenge were issued on January 15, 2016, January 20, 2016, and July 1, 2016. These notifications diluted the environmental clearance (EC) procedure for mining minor minerals in areas up to 25 hectares, categorizing them as B-2 projects. Under the B-2 category, Public Consultation, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and Environmental Management Plan (EMP) were exempted.
“The NGT bench observed that the January 15, 2016 notification contradicted the Supreme Court’s ruling in Deepak Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & Ors, which mandated that all mining leases, regardless of size, must obtain Environmental Clearance and adhere to strict regulations similar to major minerals.”
Following this, the Union Government issued an Office Memorandum (OM) on December 12, 2018, rendering DEIAA dysfunctional. The workload of DEIAA was subsequently transferred to SEIAA. Further OMs were issued on December 15, 2021, and April 28, 2023, mandating that SEIAA handle all EC grants for B-2 category mining leases instead of DEIAA.
As a result of these changes, all ECs issued by DEIAA between January 15, 2016, and September 13, 2018, must be re-appraised by SEIAA. Considering the backlog, the Supreme Court extended the deadline for this re-appraisal until March 31, 2025.
Case Details : Case Details : Union of India v. Rajiv Suri | Civil Appeal Nos. 3799-3800/2019
