National Green Tribunal Imposes Penalty on Goa Coastal Authority for Procedural Delays
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has taken a stern stance against procedural delays by directing the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) to pay a penalty of Rs 50,000. This financial penalty comes as a consequence of the authority repeatedly seeking extensions to file its reply in multiple sand mining cases currently pending before the tribunal.
Repeated Failures to Meet Deadlines
The tribunal noted with concern that GCZMA had previously been granted a four-week period to submit its response but failed to do so even by August of last year. Expressing frustration over the continuous adjournments, the NGT stated, "Therefore, we grant one week's time to file their affidavit, subject to payment of Rs 50,000 in the account of the National Green Tribunal Bar Association, Western Zone Bench, keeping in view that 12 matters have to be adjourned because the reply affidavit was not filed repeatedly."
The tribunal has scheduled the next hearing for these matters on February 16, 2025, giving the coastal authority this final opportunity to comply with the directive.
Background of the Sand Mining Appeals
The NGT is currently hearing twelve separate appeals filed by the Goa River Sand Protection Network. These appeals challenge the environment clearances (ECs) granted by the Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (GSEIAA) on February 3, 2025, for sand extraction activities.
According to the appellants, GSEIAA issued ECs for sand mining across a proposed area of 4.55 hectares, with an extraction capacity set at 1,000 cubic meters per annum per permit. The mining operations were to be conducted through specific methods and subject to certain conditions.
Allegations of Coastal Regulation Zone Violations
The core contention raised by the appellants revolves around alleged violations of the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notification. They argue that the CRZ notification explicitly prohibits sand mining activities within CRZ areas. The environment clearances in question reportedly permit sand mining in seven zones along the Mandovi River and five zones in the Zuari River.
Furthermore, the appellants maintain that these clearances were issued in violation of established legal procedures since prior approval from GCZMA was mandatory before any such permissions could be granted.
NGT's Observations on Regulatory Framework
In its detailed order, the NGT made several critical observations regarding the regulatory framework governing coastal areas. The tribunal noted that activities prohibited in CRZ areas under the CRZ Notification of 2011 specifically include the mining of sand, rocks, and other sub-strata materials.
The tribunal further referenced an office memorandum issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) on April 26, 2022. This memorandum clearly states that projects in CRZ areas requiring category 'B' environment clearance must obtain combined EC and CRZ clearances through GCZMA before consideration by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority.
"We note that this procedure was not followed in the present case," the tribunal observed, highlighting the procedural lapses in the granting of environment clearances for sand mining activities in ecologically sensitive coastal zones.
This case underscores the ongoing tension between developmental activities and environmental protection in coastal regions, with regulatory bodies being held accountable for both procedural compliance and timely responses to judicial proceedings.
