The Supreme Court of India has made it clear that a valid and up-to-date District Survey Report (DSR) is an essential prerequisite for obtaining Environmental Clearance (EC) for sand mining projects. The court ruled that the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to conduct an e-auction for sand mining leases based on an expired 2017 DSR and an incomplete 2023 draft DSR was legally unsustainable.

Read also: Supreme Court Condemns BJP MP Nishikant Dubey's Remarks Against Judiciary, CJI; Labels Them 'Highly Irresponsible'

This verdict came after the National Green Tribunal (NGT) struck down the Uttar Pradesh government’s e-auction notice for sand mining, which relied on the expired DSR from 2017 (which lapsed in 2022) and a draft DSR from 2023 that had not been finalized. The Supreme Court upheld the NGT’s decision, emphasizing the legal necessity of having a valid DSR for EC in Category B2 minor mineral projects under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notifications.

“A DSR must be current and valid; reliance on expired or draft DSRs is legally unsustainable,” the court emphasized.

Read also: Supreme Court Urges Centre to Clear Collegium Recommendations to Address High Court Vacancies

The bench, comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra, highlighted that the preparation of a DSR as per the prescribed procedure is mandatory for environmental clearances. The court also stated that the DSR is not only crucial for granting EC but also serves as the foundation for environmental assessment and project appraisal.

1. Mandatory Nature of DSR: The court declared that a DSR is essential for EC applications in sand mining and must be prepared and updated every five years. Reliance on outdated or draft DSRs is not permissible.
2. Validity Period of DSR: The DSR has a lifespan of five years, after which a new DSR must be prepared. The court explained that this five-year period is necessary because of the rapidly changing environmental conditions.
3. Role of Authorities: The District Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA) and the District Environment Appraisal Committee (DEAC) were identified as the authorities responsible for preparing and maintaining the DSR.

“A draft DSR is virtually a non-existing document for the purpose of granting environmental clearance.” — Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court concluded by affirming the NGT’s decision, declaring that:

Read also: Supreme Court Urges Centre to Clear Collegium Recommendations to Address High Court Vacancies

• A valid and subsisting DSR is mandatory for granting EC.
• Draft or expired DSRs cannot be used for EC applications.
• Authorities must strictly ensure the preparation and maintenance of DSRs every five years.

The appeal by the Uttar Pradesh government was dismissed.

Case Title: STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. VERSUS GAURAV KUMAR & ORS.

Appearance:

For Appellant(s): Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv.(Arguing counsel) Mr. Vanshdeep Dalmia, AOR (Arguing counsel) Ms. Natasha Dalmia, Adv. Ms. Anisha Jain, Adv. Ms. Shambhavi Singh, Adv. Mr. S.P. Singh, Sr. Adv.(Arguing counsel) Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, AOR Ms. Kavya Roy Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Shannu Baghel, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohit Gupta, Adv. Ms. Tabasum Bano, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,A.S.G (Arguing counsel) Mr. Vishnu Shankar Jain, AOR Ms. Marbiang Khongwir, Adv. Mr. Parth Yadav, Adv. Ms. Mani Munjal, Adv.

For Respondent(s): Mr. Ajit Sharma, AOR(Arguing counsel) Parul Goyal, Adv. Mr. Kanchan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Yuvrajsinh Solanki, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Adv. Mr. Suraj Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kr. Panda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shashwat Panda, Adv. Mr. Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, AOR Manoranjan Paikaray, Adv.