Judgment of the Supreme Court regarding district survey report for environmental clearance, 08/05/2025
Judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh & Others Vs Gaurav Kumar & Others dated 08/05/2025.
The bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra categorically stated that the Supreme Court "upholds the law and the regulations governing sand mining, demanding zero tolerance for unauthorized activities, strict adherence to these regulations is non-negotiable."
The apex court upheld the decision of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) quashing e-auction notice, February 13, 2023 issued by the Uttar Pradesh government for sand mining and the consequent grant of Letters of Interest (LOIs) in favour of successful bidders on the ground that the auction was conducted in the absence of a valid, final and a subsisting District Survey Report (DSR).
The SC also held that a Draft DSR is not tenable. "A draft DSR can never be the basis for a recommendation by the District Level Expert Appraisal Committee (DEAC) and for the District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA) for B2 category projects pertaining to mining of minor minerals lease area less than or equal to five hectares to grant environment clearance."
On February 13, 2023 District Magistrate, Saharanpur issued notice inviting e-tenders for sand gravel, boulders available in the riverbed in Saharanpur district under the U.P. Sub Mineral (Remedy) Rules, 2021. Questioning the legality and validity of the e-auction notice, a resident of Haryana approached the National Green Tribunal by filing an application contending that the e-auction notice is illegal as there was no District Survey Report (DSR) as on that date. It was his contention that the last DSR for the Saharanpur district of 2017 expired in the year 2022. Thereafter, steps were taken to prepare a DSR for the succeeding 5 years for Saharanpur district, but only a draft DRS was ready by January 13, 2023. However, even before its finalization, the impugned e-auction notice was issued by District Magistrate, Saharanpur on February 13, 2023.
in view of the fact that the last subsisting DSR issued in 2017 expired after five years, i.e. by 2022 and that only a draft DSR dated January 13, 2023 was subsisting when the impugned e-auction notice dated February 13, 2023 was issued, the NGT quashed the auction on the ground that it is in violation of the legal mandate under the 2006 EIA Notification, as amended in 2006, 2018 and also the Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020 and decision of the Supreme Court.
Questioning the legality and validity of the judgment of the NGT, 3 appeals were filed before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court agreed with the reasoning and the conclusions drawn by the NGT and dismissed the civil appeals. The court said the impact of sand mining on the environment. the court said that while a complete ban on sand mining is impractical, the need is sustainable development with effective regulation.
The SC took into consideration the regulatory regime introduced from time to time, which increased the width as well as the depth of scrutiny before granting an environmental clearance for sand mining, the apex court stated that "there is a mandatory requirement of preparation of a DSR".
The DSR should form the basis for application of environmental clearance. It shall also be the basis for preparation of reports and also appraisal of the projects. Another important facet of DSR is that it shall be prepared for all the districts and the draft is to be placed in the public domain, the judgment said.
The final DSR will then be finalized within 6 months by the District Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA). The lifetime of the report is five years. After five years the existing DSR will not be tenable and a new DSR will have to be prepared and finalized. The purpose and object of prescribing a lifetime of five years for subsistence of a DSR is for the reason that the position of ecology and the environment is rapidly changing and the position that exists five years back, may not subsist for later days.
The SC concluded by saying that a district survey report is a document of seminal importance as it enables informed decision making. Preparation of a DSR as per the procedure prescribed for its preparation should be followed meticulously. A valid and a subsisting DSR alone can be the basis for an application for grant of EC.
A draft DSR is untenable for grant of an EC. Preparation of reports and appraisal of projects by DEIAA and DEAC shall be on the basis of a valid and a subsisting DSR. DEIAA and DEAC are recognized as the authorities fastened with the statutory duty of preparing the DSR every five years and this duty compels them to have a comprehensive and a real time perspective of the environment position of the district including its eco-sensitivity and other fragilities, the SC said.