The State government on Wednesday told the Madras High Court that it never envisaged that businessmen would import river sand from foreign countries until a Pudukottai based private company struck a deal with a Singapore based firm for purchase of 1 lakh tonnes of sand quarried from Sungai Pahang River in Kuantan in Malaysia and the first consignment of 55,443 tonnes reached the VOC Port Trust in Thoothukudi on October 14, 2017.
Advocate General Vijay Narayan made the submission before the first Division Bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose who were seized of a public interest litigation petition filed by L. Adimoolam, publisher of a Tamil daily. The petitioner had challenged various regulations imposed by the government on import of sand including the insistence on selling such sand only to the Public Works Department and not to others.
Explaining reasons for the government having imposed such restrictions, the A-G said that the quality of sand depends upon the content of silica in it. Sand with more than 60% to 65% of silica was not considered appropriate for use in construction of buildings since it would not act as a good binding agent. Apart from that it could also cause health hazards. Therefore, such sand was used only for industrial purposes in optical, ceramic and abrasive industries.
Insofaras Tamil Nadu was concerned, there had been over exploitation of river sand in the last 20 to 25 years and therefore the government had decided to take over mining of sand and create a monopoly in its trade. The recent restrictions imposed on imported sand was an extension of such a monopoly. He claimed that the State government was empowered to impose restrictions on imported sand too since sand had been classified as a ‘minor mineral.’
Earlier, senior counsel P. Wilson, representing the writ petitioner, contended that the regulations imposed by the State government were in direct contravention to the Centre’s import policy for natural sand. He pointed out that the import policy was revised in 2014 and importers were permitted to obtain the mineral from foreign countries in order to meet out the high demand for it in the country and also to control the rise in domestic price of river sand.
Pointing out that the State government had imposed the recent restrictions not by way of a law passed in the State legislature but just through executive instructions issued by way of a Government Order, senior counsel said: “This G.O. tinkers with the import policy of the Centre. It will become an economical waste if importers are not allowed to sell foreign sand in the open market. That is why I am saying that this G.O. is illegal and irrational.”
Further, stating that the right to trade was a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, he said the State government could not deprive importers of their property and insist that the commodity should be sold only to the State. Insofaras the locus standi of the PIL petitioner was concerned, the senior counsel contended that the petitioner was before the court because irrational curbs on importing sand would affect people’s right to shelter.
