Eco-sensitive zone norms clarified: mining barred in sanctuaries, with limited continuation of existing lawful activities.

A minimum eco-sensitive zone of one kilometre was prescribed around protected forests generally, while Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary was treated as a special case with a 500-metre zone for subsisting activities and one kilometre for new activities. Mining within national parks and wildlife sanctuaries was prohibited, and only pre-existing non-prohibited activities within the eco-sensitive zone could continue subject to forest authority control and the applicable protected-area restrictions. The proceedings were treated as having an in rem environmental character, so persons directly affected by the proposed directions could seek participation; impleadment was allowed for specified applicants and refused for the remaining applicants identified in the order.

---

---

Issues: (i) What minimum eco-sensitive zone should be maintained around national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, and whether Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary required a special norm; (ii) whether mining could continue within national parks, sanctuaries, and their buffer zones, and on what terms existing activities could be regulated; (iii) whether persons claiming mining interests in the sanctuary area were entitled to impleadment in the proceedings.

Issue (i): What minimum eco-sensitive zone should be maintained around national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, and whether Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary required a special norm?

Analysis: The existing Guidelines for declaration of eco-sensitive zones were accepted as a reasonable framework, but uniform treatment for every protected area was found to be impracticable. The decision balanced ecological imperatives with site-specific realities and treated the minimum zone as a general rule, while recognising that special circumstances could justify variation. Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary was treated as a special case because of its prior history of mining, the earlier directions in that matter, and the need to calibrate the buffer for subsisting as well as future activities separately.

Conclusion: A minimum eco-sensitive zone of one kilometre was directed for protected forests generally, while Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary was fixed at 500 metres for subsisting activities and one kilometre for new activities.

Issue (ii): Whether mining could continue within national parks, sanctuaries, and their buffer zones, and on what terms existing activities could be regulated?

Analysis: Mining inside national parks and wildlife sanctuaries was held impermissible. Existing activities within the prescribed eco-sensitive zone were allowed only if they did not fall within the prohibited list under the Guidelines and only subject to regulatory control by the forest authorities. The decision proceeded on the Public Trust Doctrine, the Precautionary Principle, and the need for sustainable development, and it also required strict compliance with the listed protected-area restrictions. Wider protected-area buffers already prescribed by law were left undisturbed.

Conclusion: Mining within national parks and wildlife sanctuaries was prohibited, while only pre-existing non-prohibited activities within the eco-sensitive zone could continue with the required permissions.

Issue (iii): Whether persons claiming mining interests in the sanctuary area were entitled to impleadment in the proceedings?

Analysis: The proceedings were treated as having an in rem character because orders in a public interest environmental matter could affect persons not originally on record. Persons directly affected by the proposed directions were therefore allowed to participate where their interests were likely to be impacted by the final outcome.

Conclusion: Impleadment was allowed for the specified applicants and rejected for the remaining applicants identified in the order.

Final Conclusion: The proceedings were concluded by fixing the governing eco-sensitive-zone norms for protected forests, prohibiting mining within sanctuaries and national parks, regulating existing lawful activities in buffer areas, and disposing of the related intervention requests and connected applications in part.

---