2025:JHHC:29918-DB -1 of 3- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (PIL) No. 6751 of 2022 Court on its own motion Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through its Chief Secretary Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, PO & PS - Doranda, District-Ranchi 2. Principal Secretary, Mines and Geology Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, PO & PS: Doranda, District-Ranchi 3. Mines Commissioner, Mining Department, Nepal House, PO & PS: Doranda, District-Ranchi 4. Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, PO & PS: Dhurwa, District- Ranchi 5. Director General of Police, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, PO & PS: Dhurwa, District-Ranchi 6. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Government of Jharkhand, Koylanchal, PO & PS: Bokaro, District-Bokaro 7. Senior Superintendent of Police (Rural), Dhanbad, PO & PS: Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad 8. M/s. Sone Baba Stone Minerals, through its proprietor Kailash Yadav, son of Late Tejo Mahto, resident of Village: Purnadih, PO: Fulbariya, PS: Nawalshahi, District-Koderma 9. M/s. Chinnamastika Stone Minerals, a partnership firm through one of its partners Dihchand Mehta, son of Jai Narayan Mehta, resident of Village: Bigha, PO: Fulbariya, PS: Nawalshahi, District-Koderma ... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Ruchi Mukhi, A.C. to A.A.G.-IA. For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Prabhash Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent No. 9 : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Gupta, Advocate. --------- 15/Dated: 25.09.2025 1. This Court has been monitoring this petition for a period of nearly 3 years and different orders safeguarding the interest of the petitioner and other residents of the area have been passed from time to time. It was only left upon the Board, then to determine the water flow that was flowing out from the outlet of Respondent-M/s. Chinnamastika Stone 2025:JHHC:29918-DB -2 of 3- Minerals and accordingly, on 27.02.2025, this Court passed the following orders:- “The statement made by the counsel for 9th respondent that his client has already installed the water treatment plant is corroborated by the Pollution Control Board also. The effectiveness of the water treatment place would have to be Mant Men judged once the mining operations are commenced by the 9th respondent. As of now, they have not commenced, according to both the Pollution Control Board and the 9th respondent. 2) List the matter on 19.06.2025 for filing of a status report by the Pollution Control Board about the quality of water after the 9th respondent commences mining operation and after it is treated in the water treatment plant, set up by him.” 2. In compliance to the order, an affidavit, though was filed by respondent No.4 however, Court was not satisfied with the said affidavit as it was not in a position to gather as to whether the samples of water collected within the prescribed limits of the rules/instruction of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 operating in the field. Respondent No. 4 has now filed a supplementary affidavit dated 02.09.2025 and we shall have to reproduce para-6 thereof, which reads as under:- "6. That it is humbly stated and submitted that, the parameters which have been taken into consideration in the report submitted by R.O Dhanbad of the Regional Office-cum Laboratory vis-à-vis the prescribed permissible limits in terms of the Rule 3A of E (P) Rules is being summarized in a comparable chart as follows: Analysis report of Physico-chemical parameters of River/Sewage/Trade Effluent: S. No. Parameters Limits (as prescribed under Rule 3A, Schedule VI of E(P) Rules, 1986) Value Obtained 1. Temperature A/W 0C Not prescribed 20/25 2. pH 5.5 to 9.0 7.5 3. Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.) Not prescribed 6.5 2025:JHHC:29918-DB -3 of 3- mg / lt 4. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) mg/lt Not prescribed 204 5. Total Solids (T.S.) mg/lt Not prescribed 502 6. Total Suspended Solids (T.S.S.) mg/lt 200 70 7. Total Dissolved Solids (T.D.S.) mg/lt Not prescribed 432 8. Total Hardness mg/lt Not prescribed 128.0 9. Calcium mg/lt Not prescribed 27.2 10. Magnesium mg/lt Not prescribed 14.64 11. Chloride mg/lt Not prescribed 38 12. Alkanity mg/lt Not prescribed 96 3. Since the water as discharged by respondent No. 9, has been found within the permissible level, we are of the considered view that the instant W.P. (PIL) has now achieved its purpose and is accordingly disposed of. It is made clear that in case the petitioner has any or further grievance in future, he is at liberty to avail of such remedy as available to him under the law including the right to revive the instant W.P.(PIL). The instant W.P. (PIL) is accordingly, disposed of. 3. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 25.09.2025 N.A.F.R. APK/VK