1 CGHC010044522026 2026:CGHC:38998-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 8 of 2026 Om Prakash Sen S/o Shri Manohar Lal Sen Aged About 59 Years R/o Village- Nisda, Post Office - Paragaon, Police Station And Tehsil- Aarang, District- Raipur (C.G.), Mo. No. 9926199426 ... Petitioner versus 1 - Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Mines, Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi 110001. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mines And Minerals Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Additional Secretary Government Of C.G., Mines And Mineral Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Environment Conservation Board Through Member Secretary Prayas Bhawan, North Block Sector- 19, Atal Nagar District- Raipur, (C.G.) 5 - Director Directorate Of Geology And Mining, Indravati Bhawan, Block-4, First And Second Floor, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 6 - Joint Director Directorate Of Geology And Mining, Indravati Bhawan, Block-4, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 7 - The Collector (Mining) Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.09.03 19:06:27 +0530 2 8 - Shri Santosh Yadav S/o Shri Ram Ashray Yadav, R/o Ghodari, Tahsil And District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 9 - Shri Shyam Sundar Yadav S/o Shri Indra Singh Yadav R/o Krishna Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 10 - Lal Chand Agrawal S/o Shri Ghisaram Agrawal R/o Saraipali, Mahasamund, Distt.- Mahasamund, (C.G.) 11 - Jai Bagrang Aydyogik Khadan Kamgar, Cooperative Society, Through President Shri Bhagwani Ram Nishad, S/o Shri Shyam Lal Nishad, R/o Village - Paragaon - Nisda, Tehsil- Aarang, District- Raipur (C.G.) 12 - Devanand Sahu S/o Shri Parshadi Ram Sahu R/o 238, Rathore Gali, Yatiyatan, Ward No. 2, Imlibhata Mahasamund Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G.) 13 - Dushyant Sahu S/o Shri Subhash Sahu R/o Nisda, Post Office - Paragaon, Tehsil - Aarang, District- Raipur (C.G.) 14 - Dhanesh Sahu S/o Shri Kejuram Sahu R/o 475 Neem Para, Village- Nisda, Tehsil- Aarang, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 15 - Gram Panchayat R/o Village- Nisda, Tehsil- Aarang, District- Raipur, (C.G.) ---- Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Smita Jha, Advocate For Respondent No.1/UOI : Ms. Annapurna Tiwari, learned CGC For Respondents/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional A.G. For respective Respondents : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Advocate Mr. Trivikram Nayak, Advocate Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate Ms. Muskaan Fatwani, Advocate Mr. Shahil Singh, Advocate 3 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 03/09/2026 1. The present Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner, a resident of Village Nisda, Tehsil Aarang, District Raipur, alleging illegal mining of flagstone/farshistone by private respondents No.8 to 14 beyond their sanctioned lease areas, including alleged encroachment over adjoining land and dumping of mining waste into the Mahanadi River, causing environmental and other difficulties to the villagers. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition (PIL) seeking for the following reliefs: “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record concerning the case of the petitioner from the respondent authorities for its kind perusal. (ii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to accept the writ and direct the respondent authorities to take stringent action on the private respondent and close/stopped the illegal mining, in the interest of justice. (iii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to award the cost and expenses of this petition. (iv) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to order initiate inquiry upon the encroachment of the government land by the private respondent and to award the caste for illegal mining. (v) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any other writ direction are orders in favor of the petitioner and against the respondent upon 4 this facts in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and in equity. (vi) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased direct the respondent authorities to take effective and appropriate action to ensure closure/stoppage of all the illegal mining activities in the concerned areas and direct prosecution to punish all those found guilty of this illegal mining in violation of MMDR Act, 1957 and other relevant law. (vii) Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner, a resident of Village Nisda, Tehsil Aarang, District Raipur, has filed the present Public Interest Litigation alleging that private respondents No.8 to 14, who were granted mining leases for flagstone/farshistone/limestone, have carried out excavation beyond the sanctioned lease areas and have allegedly encroached upon adjoining land. It is further alleged that mining waste has been dumped in the Mahanadi River and other places, causing environmental damage and adversely affecting the villagers and their agricultural land. Despite various complaints and representations made before the concerned authorities, the petitioner alleges that effective action was not taken, compelling him to approach this Court seeking appropriate directions for stoppage of the alleged illegal mining and for taking action against the persons responsible. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the grievance raised in the present petition was with regard to excavation beyond the leased area and dumping of the excavated material in the river. She would submit that, though the State Government has cancelled the 5 mining leases of the erring leaseholders and the Environment Conservation Board has also directed stoppage of the mining activities, appropriate steps are required to be taken to ensure that no further excavation or mining activity is carried out beyond the leased area and no excavated material is dumped in the river. She would, therefore, pray that necessary directions be issued to the State authorities as well as the Environment Conservation Board to ensure strict compliance and to prevent any further illegal excavation or dumping activity in the area. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Union of India would submit that the grievance raised in the present petition has been duly considered by the concerned authorities and appropriate action has already been taken by the State Government against the erring leaseholders. He would submit that, as the mining leases have since been cancelled and no lease is presently functional in the concerned area, the grievance regarding excavation beyond the leased area does not survive at present. He would further submit that the matter may accordingly be disposed of, subject to the State authorities and the Environment Conservation Board taking necessary action in the event of any further illegal excavation or dumping of material in the river. 6. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State would submit that, pursuant to the inquiry conducted by the competent authorities, the mining leases of all the erring leaseholders have already been cancelled by the State Government. He would further submit that the Environment Conservation Board has also taken 6 necessary action and issued directions for stoppage of the mining activities. It is submitted that, at present, none of the mining leases in the concerned area is functional. He would further submit that the private respondents have challenged the action taken by the State Government before the appropriate forum and the said appeal is presently pending. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents would submit that the action taken by the State Government has been challenged by the private respondents before the appropriate forum and the matter is pending consideration. 8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein above and also gone through the entire records of the case with utmost circumspection. 9. The grievance raised in the present Public Interest Litigation essentially relates to excavation beyond the leased area by the private respondents and dumping of the excavated material in the river. From the submissions made before us, it appears that pursuant to the inquiry conducted by the competent authorities, the mining leases of all the erring leaseholders have already been cancelled by the State Government. It has further been submitted that the Environment Conservation Board has also taken necessary action and issued directions for stoppage of the mining activities. At present, none of the mining leases in the concerned area is stated to be functional. 10. It is also brought to our notice that the action taken by the State 7 Government has been assailed by the private respondents before the appropriate forum and the appeal is pending consideration. In view of the aforesaid developments and the action already taken by the concerned authorities, no further adjudication in the present Public Interest Litigation is called for at this stage. 11. Accordingly, the present Public Interest Litigation is disposed of. However, the State authorities as well as the Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board shall remain vigilant and shall take all necessary steps in accordance with law if any further excavation beyond the leased area or dumping of excavated material in the river is found to have taken place. It is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of the appropriate forum considering the challenge/appeal preferred by the private respondents against the action taken by the State Government. 12. The security amount deposited by the petitioner in connection with the present Public Interest Litigation shall be refunded to the petitioner in accordance with the rules, upon due verification and completion of all necessary formalities. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved