The Bombay High Court(Kolhapur Bench) has quashed three orders passed by Maharashtra’s Mining Minister that permitted removal of iron ore dumps from forest land at Redi, Sindhudurg, without prior Central Government approval under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The Court rejected the argument that ownership of the dumps (vesting under Section 48 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code) could bypass the Forest Act.
The civil court decree declaring NIMCO’s ownership remained binding but could not substitute for statutory forest clearance. Delay or acquiescence could not validate orders violating forest-conservation requirements, particularly where larger ecological interests were involved, added the Court.
The Court held that Section 2 of the Forest Act prohibits not just the physical commencement of non-forest activity but also the very order authorising such use, unless prior Central approval is obtained. It clarified that a conditional direction to obtain clearance later does not cure the defect, as an ex post facto approval is legally impermissible.
Importantly, the approval granted to Maharashtra Maritime Board (MMB) for Redi Port development could not benefit NIMCO, Gadag Mines, or Ballal. Forest-diversion scrutiny is proposal-specific, tied to the proposed activity, the area, compensatory costs, and conditions are not a blanket clearance attached to the land, added the Court.
Briefly, Dinanath Ballal and Redi Port Ltd filed petitions concerning permissions granted by Maharashtra’s Mining Minister to remove low-grade iron ore dumps from land identified for expansion of Redi Port. NIMCO had deposited mining rejects on the seashore and seabed, and the area subsequently acquired the status of forest land following plantation.
Ballal received permissions for dump removal in 2018 and 2019. In October 2021, the Minister reviewed the earlier order, cancelled Ballal’s permission and permitted NIMCO/Gadag Mines to remove the dumps. Redi Port Ltd challenged these permissions and also sought a direction requiring the State to allot the land to Maharashtra Maritime Board (MMB), which would then make it available for port development. Central Government approval for forest diversion had been granted to MMB specifically for development of Redi Port.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh and Justice Neeraj P. Dhote observed that NIMCO’s civil court decree declaring ownership of the dumped material remained binding on the State, even though the decree did not grant possession or injunction and was not executable. However, ownership of the dumps could not dispense with statutory forest clearance. The Minister had not examined how the dumps would be removed or the impact of removal on the forest land.
Given the thick vegetation, the Court was not prepared to accept that the activity could take place without digging, excavation or damage to the land’s surface merely because State policy did not classify dump removal as “mining operations”. The Court said that the forest-diversion approvals were issued to MMB, and Redi Port Ltd had not established the necessary personal legal right or demand and refusal.
