Grant of mining NOC for government land without transparent public notice or bidding violates Article 14.

Through various writ petitions, the parties challenged the issuance and subsequent cancellation of No Objection Certificates (NOCs) 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 based on an individual application

Karuvakunnel Enterprises challenged this, alleging a lack of transparency and failure to notify the public

In 2021, the District Collector cancelled an extension of time granted to Abraham, leading to a challenge against the cancellation

During the pendency of the litigation, the State Government issued G.O.(MS) No. 28/2021/RD mandating e-auctions for mining on Government land

Furthermore, the Revenue and Tourism Departments submitted reports during the proceedings highlighting Vagamon as an ecologically fragile "tourist hotspot" where mining would cause irreversible environmental destruction

1. Whether an applicant can claim a "preferential right" for a mining lease under Rule 31 of the KMMC Rules, 2015, if the application was submitted without a prior public notification by the State

2. Whether the grant of an NOC for quarrying on Government property without a transparent, competitive process (like auction or public notice) violates Article 14 of the Constitution

3. Whether continued mining activities can be permitted in Vagamon considering the "Doctrine of Public Trust" and the Precautionary Principle

The court primarily applied the Doctrine of Public Trust, which mandates that the State holds natural resources in trusteeship for the public and cannot abdicate them for private commercial use

It relied on Article 14 regarding the arbitrary grant of Government largesse, as established in Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, which requires the State to act based on non-arbitrary standards

The court further applied the Precautionary Principle and the concept of Sustainable Development from M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, holding that in cases of doubt, environmental protection takes precedence over economic interest

Statutorily, the court considered Rule 31 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, regarding preferential rights

The court rejected Abraham's claim of preferential right under Rule 31, reasoning that such a right only arises when applications are invited through a formal notification; otherwise, the "first-come, first-served" approach would allow individuals to "hand-pick" public land, defeating the rights of other potential bidders

Applying the Ramana Dayaram Shetty and Kasturi Lal precedents, the court found that granting NOCs on a "mere asking" without public notice or competitive bidding was a violation of Article 14 and an arbitrary distribution of Government largesse

Significantly, the court integrated the "Doctrine of Public Trust," noting that Vagamon’s pristine meadows and biodiversity are public assets

It weighed the Revenue and Tourism Departments' reports, which warned of threats to life, property, and environmental stability

Following M.C. Mehta, the court held that because mining in this "hotspot" posed a reasonable suspicion of harm, environmental concerns must override commercial interests

The Court directed the State Government to finalise proceedings to ban all quarrying operations in the Vagamon area within four months

Until such a decision is finalized, the Court issued a permanent injunction against the grant of any further mining permissions in Vagamon

W.P.(C) Nos. 12096/2021 and 13906/2018 were dismissed, while W.P.(C) Nos. 40095/2018 and 9102/2022 were disposed of with the aforementioned directions.