NGT Dismisses Nagaur Sand Mining Challenge, Finds DSR Approved by Competent Authority and Application Time-Barred
The NGT Central Zone Bench dismissed a challenge to Rajasthan's Nagaur District Survey Report and related mining lease, holding the application was time-barred, non-maintainable, and an efficacious alternate remedy existed.
The National Green Tribunal's Central Zone Bench at Bhopal dismissed Original Application No. 77/2025(CZ) on 14 May 2026, rejecting a challenge by villagers from Nagaur district, Rajasthan, to the District Survey Report (DSR) 2022-23 and a Notice Inviting Tender dated 1 July 2024 for sand mining leases. The Bench, comprising Justice Sheo Kumar Singh (Judicial Member) and Dr. A. Senthil Vel (Expert Member), found that the DSR had been examined and approved by the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee and the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority through a documented process, that the application raised multiple causes of action impermissibly in a single filing, that affected third parties had not been impleaded, and that the applicants had an alternate and efficacious remedy by way of appeal which they had not pursued. The application was also held to be barred by limitation.
The Dispute Before the Tribunal
The applicants, residents of villages in the vicinity of plot no. 5 of village Jhintia Suriyas, Tehsil Riyan Bari, District Nagaur, filed the original application challenging the DSR 2022-23 prepared by the Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Rajasthan, for Nagaur district. Their grievance crystallised when a Letter of Intent was issued for mining plot no. 5, measuring 77.80 hectares with a yearly capacity of 1,50,744.96 metric tonnes. The applicants came to know of the proposed mining through a public notice regarding Environmental Clearance for the plot.
The applicants had submitted written objections to the District Collector and participated in a public hearing held on 27 March 2025 for Environmental Clearance. Among their concerns: approximately 10,000 trees planted by the Forest Department in 2013 and handed over to the local panchayat stood within the proposed mining area; a river had seen regular water flow after a gap of 44 years, recharging tubewells and wells essential to local livelihoods; and local wildlife including desert foxes, monitored lizards, caracal, and sandgrouse birds inhabited the area. Despite these objections, Environmental Clearance was granted by SEIAA on 19 June 2025, and the mining lease was registered on 24 June 2025 in favour of Shri Naman Choudhary.
The applicants obtained the DSR through an RTI application and argued that it was prepared in violation of the Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for Sand Mining, 2020 (EMGSM-2020) and the directions of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 3661-3662 of 2020.
What the Applicants Alleged About the DSR
The applicants raised four specific procedural defects in the DSR 2022-23. First, no Sub-Divisional Committee was constituted or documented to have conducted mandatory site visits. Second, the DSR contained verbatim reproduction of general recommendations from the earlier DSR 2017-18, demonstrating, in their submission, non-application of mind and absence of fresh scientific assessment over a five-year period. Third, no public consultation process was followed, including the mandatory publication of the DSR for public comments for at least one month. Fourth, the DSR lacked site-specific data and scientific analysis, appearing to have been drafted in a templated and superficial manner.
The applicants relied on the MoEF&CC Notification dated 25 July 2018 under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, which prescribes the procedure for preparation of DSRs for sand or riverbed mining, including constitution of a Sub-Divisional Committee comprising the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and officers from the Irrigation Department, State Pollution Control Board, Forest Department, and Geology or Mining Department. They also relied on Clause 4.1.1(o) and (p) of the EMGSM-2020, which require site visits by a sub-divisional committee and public consultation for at least one month before finalisation of the DSR.
The State and SEIAA's Response
The State of Rajasthan raised a preliminary objection that the application was time-barred. It further argued that the applicants had filed the application at a belated stage instead of pursuing an appeal against the DSR or the Environmental Clearance. The State warned that any adverse order on the DSR of 2022-23, which had been approved for 16 districts of Rajasthan, would automatically affect mining leases, auction proceedings, allotments, and Environmental Clearances across all those districts, prejudicing parties who were not before the Tribunal.
SEIAA, Rajasthan, set out the procedural history of the DSR's approval in detail. The SEAC examined the DSR for Nagaur district in its meeting of 10 August 2023 and found deficiencies, after which it directed the Additional Director, Department of Mines and Geology, to submit clarifications and a revised DSR. The revised DSR was submitted on 16 August 2023 and re-examined by SEAC-1 in its meeting of 5 September 2023. SEAC-1 resolved that the revised DSRs for all 16 districts, including Nagaur, were recommended for approval subject to conditions. SEIAA formally approved the DSR for Nagaur vide letter dated 21 September 2023.
The conditions attached to the approval required the Mining Department to ensure compliance with all court directions and the guidelines of SSMMG-2016 and EMGSM-2020 before any auction or grant of mining lease, mandated updating of DSRs once every five years, and required that all environmental concerns be addressed without damage to the environment.
The Mining Department, District Nagaur, provided a detailed account of the e-auction process. The e-auction for plot no. 5 was conducted on 23 July 2024. Against a reserved amount of Rs. 31,12,000, the highest bid of Rs. 10,21,02,000 was received from Shri Naman Choudhary. The Letter of Intent was issued on 22 August 2024. The mining plan was approved on 25 September 2024. Environmental Clearance was granted by SEIAA on 19 June 2025. The lease deed was executed and registered on 24 June 2025. The Forest Department's No-Objection Certificate was obtained on 25 June 2025, and the Consent to Operate and Consent to Establish from the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board were obtained on 27 June 2025.
The Mining Department also stated that the DSR for Nagaur was prepared by M/s N.K. Enkayrons Service Pvt. Ltd., an NABET/NABL-accredited consultant, that the draft DSR was uploaded on the district website and kept in the public domain for 21 days, and that no objections were received from any person or institution before it was forwarded to SEIAA.
Prior Litigation on the Same DSR
The Tribunal noted that the validity of the same DSR for Rajasthan's districts had already been litigated before the High Court of Judicature at Rajasthan, Jodhpur. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5291/2024, which challenged the e-auction advertisement dated 15 February 2024 on the ground that the DSR for Bhilwara and other districts was not prepared in accordance with the SSMMG-2016 and EMGSM-2020, was rejected by the Single Judge on 22 March 2024. Special Appeal Writs No. 420/2024 and 421/2024 filed before the Division Bench against that order were dismissed on 6 May 2024.
The Division Bench, in dismissing those appeals, observed that the DSR had been prepared after detailed examination and strictly in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. It found that the Mining Department had submitted revised DSRs incorporating the SEAC's observations, that objections had been invited and considered, and that the Sub-Divisional Committee had included representatives of the Revenue Department, Mines and Geology, Water Resources, and Pollution Control Board. The Division Bench also noted that the petitioner in those proceedings was himself a mining operator whose lease had expired and who had not participated in the auction.
The Tribunal also referred to O.A. No. 194/2024(CZ), which had been decided on 30 September 2024, as a further instance of the same DSR having been placed in the public domain and adjudicated.
The Legal Framework the Tribunal Applied
The Tribunal set out the regulatory architecture governing DSR preparation. The MoEF&CC Notification dated 25 July 2018 under Section 3(1) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, read with Rule 5(4) of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, amended the EIA Notification dated 14 September 2006 and prescribed the procedure for DSR preparation. The EMGSM-2020 requires DSRs to be prepared before any auction or grant of mining lease, mandates site visits by a Sub-Divisional Committee, and requires public consultation for at least one month.
The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in State of Bihar and Ors. v. Pawan Kumar and Ors. (Civil Appeal Nos. 3661-3662 of 2020, decided 10 November 2021), which had considered the essentiality of DSRs and directed that DSRs be prepared by Sub-Divisional Committees through site visits, examined by SEAC, and approved by SEIAA. That judgment had also noted the adverse environmental consequences of unregulated sand mining, including threats to biodiversity, riverine vegetation, water sources, riparian ecology, and the structural integrity of bridges.
The Tribunal also referred to the NGT Principal Bench's order dated 26 February 2021 in O.A. No. 360/2015, which had directed that DSRs be prepared through NABET/NABL-accredited consultants, verified by the District Magistrate, and evaluated by SEAC before SEIAA approval, a procedure the Rajasthan authorities had followed.
On the question of judicial deference to expert bodies, the Tribunal cited the Supreme Court's observations in N.D. Jayal & Anr. v. Union of India (2004 (9) SCC 362) that courts should not sit in judgment over the cutting edge of scientific analysis and that when the government or concerned authorities, after due consideration and full application of mind, take a decision, it is not appropriate for courts to interfere. The Tribunal also referred to Sam Built Well Private Limited v. Deepak Builders (2018 (2) SCC 176) for the principle that where expert committees have scrutinised a matter without malafides or perversity being established, the principle of judicial restraint applies.
Why the Tribunal Dismissed the Application
The Tribunal identified four independent grounds for dismissal.
First, the application was barred by limitation. The DSR was approved on 21 September 2023 and the NIT was issued on 1 July 2024. The applicants filed the original application in 2025, after a gap of three to four years from the earliest impugned action. The Tribunal held that the doctrine of waiver applied and that the reliefs sought were time-barred.
Second, the application was not maintainable because it bundled multiple causes of action in a single filing. The National Green Tribunal Practice and Procedure Rules, 2011, provide that an application or appeal shall be based upon a single cause of action. The applicants had sought, in a single application, the quashing of the DSR, the NIT, the mining lease, the Environmental Clearance, and the consent conditions, along with directions for environmental compensation and restitution.
Third, necessary parties had not been impleaded. The DSR covered 16 districts of Rajasthan. Any adverse order on the DSR would affect mining leases, auction proceedings, and Environmental Clearances across all those districts. Persons in whose favour mines had been allotted and who had deposited amounts pursuant to Letters of Intent had not been made parties and could not be adversely affected without an opportunity of hearing.
Fourth, an alternate and efficacious remedy was available. The orders under challenge, the DSR approval, the NIT, the mining lease, the Environmental Clearance, and the consent conditions, were all appealable. The applicants had not filed any appeal or revision before the appropriate forum. The SEAC and SEIAA, as statutory expert bodies with special knowledge, had examined the matter and issued necessary orders. The Tribunal held that it would not be proper to interfere with independent expert decisions unless a cogent ground had been placed, and none had been established here.
The Tribunal observed that the principle of sustainable development required balancing development priorities against environmental protection, and that the application, though framed as a challenge to the DSR's validity, had as its practical consequence the cancellation of the lease deed, NIT, tender proceedings, Letter of Intent, consent conditions, and Environmental Clearance.
Order
Original Application No. 77/2025(CZ), along with all pending interlocutory applications, was dismissed and disposed of on 14 May 2026. The Tribunal found the application devoid of merit and not maintainable. No costs were awarded. The order was signed by Justice Sheo Kumar Singh, Judicial Member, and Dr. A. Senthil Vel, Expert Member.