The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved verdict on the plea of the Reddy brothers to allow mining operations in the Obulapuram mines in the reserve forests bordering Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.
A three-judge Bench of Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan, Justice Deepak Verma and Justice B.S. Chauhan reserved the verdict after hearing Attorney General G. E. Vahanvati, appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam for the Survey of India (SoI) which conducting the survey of mining leases, senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, senior counsel K. Parasaran and senior counsel P.P. Rao on behalf of the mine operators. The Bench heard the appeal filed by the Andhra Pradesh government against an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court allowing mining activities by Obulapuram Mining Company (OMC). The Supreme Court had stayed the mining activities and in the meanwhile ordered a survey by the SoI.
The SoI conducted a detailed survey of the six mines, including three belonging to the Reddy brothers and submitted its report, along with charts and maps and said that mining should not be allowed till fresh demarcation was completed. Mr. Vahanvati pointed out that under the mining rules, show cause notice could be issued for cancellation of the lease if the boundaries were removed. In this case, the pillars and boundaries had been removed and till the leases were properly demarcated, mining could not be allowed.
Mr. Vahanvati said since there was a boundary dispute between Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka in the mining area and there were no reference points, it was not proper to lift the stay.
Mr. Subramaniam said that it would take at least three months to finally draw the State boundaries and till then mining should be stopped.
Mr. Rohatgi, appearing for OMC, contended that there was no illegal mining by the firm as was portrayed and the entire edifice of the Government Order that the petitioner had transgressed had proved wrong. He said, “If both the States do not accept what the boundary is, how can you say that I have encroached.” He requested that mining be allowed in the undisputed area and assured the court that no mining would be done in the overlapping area. He said any condition could be imposed by the court. Mr. Parasaran and Mr. Rao endorsed Mr. Rohatgi and said that mining should be allowed in the leases in the undisputed area.
Justice Verma told the counsel that mining could not be carried on till demarcation was done, Mr. Rohatgi asked the court “should I (OMC) wait for six months till the demarcation is done for no fault.” When Justice Verma said a direction could be given for completion of the border dispute within a time frame, Mr. Rohatgi wondered what would happen if the court order was not obeyed. Justice Verma retorted “Do you say that Karnataka will have the audacity to disobey our order if we give a direction?” Mr. Rohatgi recalled the instance of Punjab government not obeying the Supreme Court direction in the Yamanu Sutlej canal river dispute and said “these things one would never say what would happen.”
