Supreme Court rules Gujarat sand movement ban exceeds authority, violates Constitution.

The Supreme Court held that the impugned rules framed by the State of Gujarat, prohibiting the movement of legally excavated sand beyond state borders, were beyond the powers granted by the MMDR Act. The Court found the rules ultra vires Sections 15, 15A, and 23-C of the Act. Additionally, the Court ruled that the rules violated Part XIII of the Constitution of India, specifically Article 301, by restricting freedom of trade and commerce. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the Gujarat High Court's judgment and rejecting contrary views from other high courts.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the impugned rules framed by the State of Gujarat are beyond the powers granted under the MMDR Act.
2. Whether the impugned rules are violative of Part XIII of the Constitution of India.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Whether the impugned rules framed by the State of Gujarat are beyond the powers granted under the MMDR Act.

The Supreme Court analyzed the powers conferred by the MMDR Act, particularly Sections 15, 15A, and 23-C. It was observed that the MMDR Act is aimed at regulating mines and development of minerals under the control of the Union. Section 15 empowers the State Government to make rules for regulating the grant of quarry leases, mining leases, or other mineral concessions in respect of minor minerals and for purposes connected therewith. However, this power does not extend to regulating the movement of already excavated minerals. The Court referred to previous judgments, including M.P.P. Kavery Chetty and K.T. Varghese, which categorically held that the State Government's power under Section 15 does not include control over minor minerals after they are excavated. The Court also noted that Section 23-C, inserted by the Amendment Act of 1999, was aimed at preventing illegal mining, transportation, and storage of minerals. The impugned rules, which prohibit the movement of legally excavated sand beyond the State borders, were found to be beyond the powers conferred by the MMDR Act. The Court concluded that the impugned rules are ultra vires Sections 15, 15A, and 23-C of the MMDR Act.

Issue 2: Whether the impugned rules are violative of Part XIII of the Constitution of India.

The Supreme Court held that the impugned rules violate Part XIII of the Constitution, which ensures the freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout the territory of India. Article 301 guarantees this freedom, while Article 302 allows Parliament to impose restrictions in the public interest. Article 303 prohibits laws that give preference to one State over another or discriminate between States. The Court emphasized that the State Government could not impose such a prohibition under a statute aimed at regulating mines and mineral development, as it would fetter the freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse. The Court also highlighted the importance of economic integration and balanced development, as envisioned by Part XIII of the Constitution. The prohibition on the transport or sale of already mined minerals outside the State was found to have no direct nexus with the object and purpose of the MMDR Act. Consequently, the impugned rules were held to be violative of Article 301 and the scheme of Part XIII of the Constitution.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the judgment of the Gujarat High Court and holding that the impugned rules are ultra vires the MMDR Act and violative of Part XIII of the Constitution. The Court did not approve the contrary views of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and Madras High Court.

---