Grant of mining concessions on government land must follow transparent, competitive bidding to satisfy Article 14 and the Public Trust Doctrine.

The High Court of Kerala heard a batch of writ petitions concerning the grant of No Objection Certificates (NOC) for quarrying operations on Government puramboke land in Vagamon Village, Idukki District.

Anish Abraham (petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 12096/2021) was granted an NOC in 2018 for 4.99 hectares.

Karuvakunnel Enterprises challenged this grant, alleging a lack of transparency and a failure to notify the public or conduct an auction.

During the pendency of the litigation, the District Collector cancelled an extension granted to Anish Abraham.

Concurrently, the State Government issued G.O.(MS) No. 28/2021/RD in 2021, mandating that NOCs for mining on Government land must be issued through an e-auction process.

Furthermore, the Revenue and Tourism Departments submitted reports during the proceedings highlighting that Vagamon is an ecologically fragile "tourist hotspot" where mining poses a threat to environmental stability and local life.

1. Whether an applicant for an NOC on Government land can claim a "preferential right" under Rule 31 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, solely by being the first to apply in the absence of a public notification.

2. Whether the grant of an NOC for quarrying on Government land without a transparent, public procedure violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

3. Whether continued mining operations in the Vagamon area are permissible under the "Doctrine of Public Trust" and the "Precautionary Principle" given its status as an ecologically sensitive tourist destination.

The court applied Rule 31 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, which provides a preferential right to the earliest applicant.

However, this was balanced against Article 14 of the Constitution, which prohibits the arbitrary grant of Government largesse.

The court relied on the Doctrine of Public Trust as articulated in M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath [(1997) 1 SCC 388], asserting that natural resources are held by the State as a trustee for the public.

It further applied the Precautionary Principle from M.C. Mehta v. Union of India [(2004) 12 SCC 118], stating that environmental protection takes precedence over economic interests in cases of doubt or suspected harm.

Finally, the court noted the mandatory e-auction guidelines for Government land mining established in G.O.(MS) No. 28/2021/RD.

The Court rejected Anish Abraham's claim of a "preferential right" under Rule 31, reasoning that seniority in application only applies when applications are submitted pursuant to a formal Government notification; otherwise, the process invites arbitrariness.

The Court found that the District Collector dealt with Government property as if it were a private gift, failing to provide public notice or ensure a transparent bidding process, thereby violating the constitutional mandate against arbitrary State action.

Integrating the environmental concerns, the Court observed that Vagamon's "pristine beauty" and biodiversity are protected by the Public Trust Doctrine.

Applying the Precautionary Principle, the Court gave weight to the 2025 reports from the Revenue and Tourism Departments which warned of irreversible ecological damage and threats to human life.

The Court concluded that the State's duty to protect the environment and maintain the "pristine glory" of the ecosystem outweighs private commercial interests in mining.

It held that the NOCs granted to Anish Abraham and others were void as they were issued without a transparent procedure or public notice.

The Court ordered the Government of Kerala to: (i) finalize proceedings to formally ban all quarrying operations in the Vagamon area within four months;

(ii) and ensure that no further mining permissions are granted in Vagamon in the interim period.

The writ petitions challenging the cancellation of NOCs were dismissed, and those challenging the grant of NOCs were allowed.