Introduction:
The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and the Environment Protection Act, 1986, strictly prohibit quarrying in and around tiger reserves. Despite these laws, illegal mining has posed a significant threat to protected areas, including the Sariska Tiger Reserve. The Supreme Court of India has been actively involved in addressing and curbing these illegal activities.
Body:
Legislative Framework:
The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and the Environment Protection Act, 1986, aim to safeguard wildlife and the environment by prohibiting activities like quarrying in protected areas, including tiger reserves.
Supreme Court Interventions:
Initial Orders and Investigations:
- In May 2005, the Supreme Court ordered the CBI to investigate the disappearance of tigers from the Aravalli reserve. This directive came nearly 15 years after the court first addressed illegal mining in Sariska.
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and Interim Orders:
- In October 1991, responding to a PIL filed by a local NGO, the Supreme Court issued an interim order prohibiting any mining operations in Sariska’s protected area. A fact-finding commission led by Justice M.L. Jain was established to investigate.
Closure of Mines:
The Jain Committee’s 1992 findings highlighted the protected area spanning approximately 800 sq km. Based on this, the Supreme Court ordered the closure of 262 mines in April 1993.
Subsequent Reports and Actions:
A decade later, the Supreme Court’s Central Empowered Committee (CEC) reported on illegal mining near the Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary, part of the Sariska Tiger Reserve. This prompted further court actions, including addressing similar issues in Goa.
Regulations and Safety Zones:
In September 2005, the Supreme Court established interim regulations for mining permits in forest regions, including maintaining a one-kilometre safety zone around the Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary.
Environmental Sensitive Zones (ESZs):
In January 2002, the Indian Board for Wildlife proposed notifying areas within 10 km of national parks and sanctuaries as ESZs. By December 2018, the Supreme Court mandated the declaration of 10-km belts around the 21 national parks and sanctuaries that had not yet submitted ESZ proposals.
Recent Developments:
The Supreme Court resolved a lawsuit in June 2022, mandating a minimum one km width for ESZs around all national parks and sanctuaries, but allowed a 500-metre limit for the Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary. In May 2024, the court clarified that this direction applied to tiger reserves, criticizing the Rajasthan government for misinterpreting it.
Conclusion:
Locals in Sariska have frequently demanded clear demarcation of forest boundaries to prevent illegal mining.
Villagers argue that undefined boundaries enable illegal mining operations to appear lawful by positioning them outside the reserve on paper.