No Licence, No Mining; Jammu Kashmir High Court Dismisses Baramulla Villagers’ Plea  | Kashmir Life

SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition by residents of Pariswani village in Baramulla seeking permission to extract sand, boulders and stones from a local nallah, holding that such activity cannot be carried out without a valid statutory licence and that neither land ownership nor past practice creates any enforceable right to mine.

In a detailed judgment, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal ruled that the petitioners had failed to establish any legal or fundamental right warranting interference under writ jurisdiction. The court held that allowing extraction in the absence of a lawful mining concession would be contrary to the statutory framework governing mineral resources and against public interest, particularly environmental protection.

The petition had been filed by inhabitants of the village through Abdul Rehman Malik and others, represented by advocate Gulzar Ahmad Sopori, who argued that families in the area had for generations depended on extraction of sand and stones from the nallah and adjoining land for their livelihood. The petitioners claimed that they had earlier deposited royalty with the government and were permitted to carry out such activity, but were now being stopped without any formal notification, leading to economic distress. They also alleged harassment, including seizure of vehicles and imposition of fines, and invoked their right to livelihood under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Opposing the plea, the government, represented by Deputy Advocate General Hakim Aman Ali and Government Advocate Illyas Nazir Laway, submitted that the legal regime governing extraction of minor minerals had undergone a fundamental change and now requires strict compliance with prescribed procedures, including grant of concessions through a regulated process. It was argued that parts of the nallah fall within State land and that the petitioners were undertaking extraction without any valid permission, amounting to illegal mining and causing environmental damage.

After examining the record, the court held that mineral resources are not an automatic incident of land ownership and are governed by a separate legal regime. It observed that the right to extract minerals flows only from a valid permission granted under law and not from past practice or payment of royalty. The court further noted that even if such extraction had been tolerated earlier, it could not continue in violation of the prevailing statutory framework.

On the argument of livelihood, the court said that while the right to carry on trade or occupation is protected, it is subject to reasonable restrictions in public interest, and activities involving exploitation of natural resources are strictly regulated. It held that livelihood concerns cannot justify an activity prohibited by law and that enforcement actions such as seizure of vehicles and penalties were in accordance with legal provisions.

The court also emphasised that the nallah, having assumed the character of a natural watercourse, is an ecological resource held in public trust and cannot be subjected to unregulated private exploitation. It warned that indiscriminate extraction of sand and stones from such areas can lead to environmental degradation, including erosion, depletion of groundwater and increased flood risk.

Dismissing the petition as devoid of merit, the court, however, clarified that the villagers are free to apply for a mining licence or concession in accordance with law, and any such application shall be considered independently on its merits.