The Supreme Court's directive to halt mining within a one-kilometre radius of the Sariska Tiger Reserve is yet another positive judicial reiteration in India's ongoing struggle to balance between development and conservation. However, the negative aspect of the verdict is equally visible — a wide spectrum of judicial interventions, right since the early 1990s, has been rendered ineffective by the state government’s reluctance to act decisively on this front. Despite repeated interventions, illegal mining continues to threaten the ecological integrity of protected areas like Sariska, highlighting the need for strict enforcement and clear demarcation of boundaries. The gulf between the positive intent of the Supreme Court and negative response from the state government will have to be bridged to bring about any meaningful change in this regard.
The bench led by Justice BR Gavai reasserted the essence of its April 2023 order, clarifying that the prohibition on mining within one kilometre of protected areas includes critical tiger habitats (CTHs) like Sariska. This clarification came in response to the Rajasthan government's erroneous claim that the ban applied only to national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, not tiger reserves. The court's insistence on a broader interpretation highlights the unique importance of tiger reserves, which stand on a "higher pedestal" than other protected areas due to their vital role in preserving India's national animal, the Bengal tiger.
Regrettably, Sariska has faced extensive illegal mining activities for decades. The Supreme Court's order is grounded in the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and the Environment Protection Act, 1986, both of which prohibit quarrying in and around tiger reserves. Despite these legal protections, over 110 mines were reportedly operating within the one-kilometre prohibited zone, flagrantly violating the court's earlier directives. Rajasthan's Sariska Tiger Reserve, located in the Alwar district, was declared a tiger reserve under Project Tiger in 1978. However, its status has not shielded it from the ravages of illegal mining. Historical records show a pattern of defiance and legal manoeuvring by mining interests. In 1991, the Supreme Court issued an interim order halting all mining activities in the protected area, a decision supported by subsequent orders in the 2000s that reiterated the prohibition. Yet, mines continued to operate, often exploiting ambiguities in boundary demarcations and leveraging bureaucratic lapses. The ongoing litigation, part of the broader TN Godavarman case which addresses forest conservation issues nationwide, has repeatedly exposed the challenges in enforcing conservation laws.
Historical documents and court records indicate numerous inconsistencies in the demarcation of the reserve's boundaries. These ambiguities have allowed illegal mining to persist under the guise of legal operations. The lack of reliable maps and the disappearance of land records have further complicated enforcement efforts. These glaring inconsistencies appear to be a manifestation of unholy nexuses operating in the state. The combined interests of mining companies and politicians/bureaucrats come in the way of the sustainability of the state's rich ecology. A fair and just balance is the need of the hour, which can come only through a strong political will.
The court's directive to formulate a closure plan for the mines and take necessary steps for compliance is a call to action for the Rajasthan government. It is an opportunity to correct past mistakes and ensure the protection of Sariska's invaluable biodiversity. Demarcating clear, enforceable boundaries for the reserve and its surrounding eco-sensitive zones is crucial. This step would prevent future encroachments and provide a legal foundation for sustained conservation efforts. Advocate K Parameshwar, assisting the court as amicus curiae, stressed that tiger habitats cannot be treated merely as buffer zones but must be recognised for their critical ecological importance. As the case progresses, the upcoming hearing in July will be crucial.