CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Monday refused to stay the notice issued to the beach sand mining lease holders for recovery of royalty evaded through illegal sand mining in Kanyakumari, Tirunelveli and Thoothukudi districts.
When the cases pertaining to illegal mining of beach sand minerals came up for hearing before the first bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy, senior counsel Aravind Datar submitted that the Tamil Nadu government has quantified the volume of the illegal mining and export of minerals, which included atomic minerals and semi-precious minerals, based on the reports of IAS officers Gagandeep Singh Bedi, Satybrata Sahoo and the amicus curiae, V Suresh, appointed by the court.
Quoting the contents of the reports, he told the court the amount of loss caused to the exchequer through illegal sand mining was Rs 5,832 crore. “Based on these reports, we have issued show cause notices to recover the royalty which has escaped,” Datar submitted.
Saying the three reports on illegal sand mining and transportation were based on scientific methods and could not be made subject matter for discussion, Datar requested that the natural justice route should be allowed to be reworked and examine the volume of illegal mining.
He also stated that among the minerals sand mines have, monazite has atomic properties. “One tonne of this mineral will yield up to one kg of monazite which has atomic properties and is fully covered by the atomic energy department and the government has banned mining. This is a very important issue of national security also,” Datar told the court.
However, senior counsel Srinath Sridevan, representing VV Minerals, stated that the mining companies disagree with the report of the Bedi committee, which was stayed by a single judge, and a retired judge was appointed to hold the exercise.
He alleged that an attempt is made to show all the mining companies in poor light.
Though Srinath Sridevan sought the court to stay the notices issued for recovery of the royalty amount, the bench declined saying all petitions on this issue could be heard on March 11, the final hearing.