Lessons not learnt

Tragic death of six miners in an abandoned coal mine in East Jaintia Hills in Meghalaya is a sobering reminder of lessons on dangers of illegal and unscientific mining. Recurrence of such coal mine tragedy, however, shows that reckless mine owners in Meghalaya never cared to learn these lessons. In December 2018, at least 16 miners died in a similar tragedy after they were trapped and buried at a depth of 370 feet in a rat-hole coal mine when water from a nearby river gushed in at Ksan in the same district. Bodies of the miners, except a few, were never retrieved even after two-month-long multi-agency rescue operation involving the Indian Navy and the National Disaster Response Force. Indiscriminate, unscientific rat-hole mining is hazardous to miners as well as the environment. In 2019, the Supreme Court passed a judgement in which it held that in event the mining is carried out by a mining lease holder as per the provisions of Act, 1957 and Rules, 1960 with an approved mining plan there can be no objections in carrying of such mining operations under the regulation and control of the State of Meghalaya. The Apex court also clarified that in event mining operations are undertaken in privately owned/community owned land in Hills Districts of Meghalaya in accordance with mining lease with approved mining plan as per the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Mineral Concessions Rule, 1960, the ban imposed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in 2014 shall not come in way of carrying mining operations. Clearly, apart from the mining lease holder, the State government as well as the Central government own the responsibility of ensuring that no coal mining can take place without an approved mining plan. The fact that over 2000 cases of illegal mining and transportation over the past five years have been registered by the Meghalaya government raises question over the efficacy of the measures initiated to curb such activities. The Supreme Court pointed out the mismatch in assessment of quantities of extracted coal by the Technical Committee appointed by the Meghalaya Government and the NGT-appointed committee. While the NGT appointed committee assessed the quantity of extracted coal 23,25,663 metric tonnes, the State government's committee assessed the quantity to be 32,56,715 MTs before the SC passed the judgement lifting the NGT ban in respect of mining with approved plan. Such discrepancies raise suspicion over attempts to pass on illegally extracted coal after the 2014 NGT ban as coal extracted prior to the ban on coal mining but was allowed to be disposed. Clearly, illegal mining has been going on in Meghalaya which if not checked will result in more loss of lives besides causing irreparable damage to nature and environment. The SC judgement also stated that allegation of "environmental degradation by illegal and unregulated coal mining were fully proved from materials on the record including the report of the experts, report of the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board, the report of Katakey (NGT) committee, which all proved environmental degradation of water, air and surface. The apex court had issued clear direction on the responsibility of the State government. The judgement said that the Mines Act, 1952 contains various provisions regarding inspection of mining operation and management of mines and the provisions of The Mines Act, 1952 are mandatory to be followed before working a mine. The regulations namely Coal Mines Regulations, 2017 also contains several regulatory provisions which need to be followed while working a mine by a mining lease holder. The enforcement of Mines Act, 1952 and the Regulations, 2017 have to be ensured by the State in the public interest, states the SC verdict. It is obligatory on the part of the Meghalaya government to ensure that due environment clearance is obtained by mine owners for a mining project. The SC in its judgement passed a clear direction stating that "while implementing statutory regime for carrying mining operations in the Hills Districts of the State of Meghalaya, the State of Meghalaya has to ensure compliance of not only MMDR Act, 1957 but Mines Act, 1952 as well as Environment (Protection) Act, 1986," and added that the State of Meghalaya has ample power and jurisdiction under the Act, 1957 and Rules, 1960 to check, control and prohibit coal mining operations in Hill Districts of State of Meghalaya. The state as well as the central government must ensure miners who belong to poor and downtrodden households are protected from being compelled to work in hazardous and sub-human condition. Legislative measures making it mandatory for mining lease holders to provide adequate health and life insurance coverages apart from dignified salary and wage and taking all precautionary measures for making the work place safer will go a long way in preventing recurrence of such tragedies.