BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, AT NEW

DELHI
APPLICATION NO.______________OF 2025
(Under Section 14 & 15 (b) & (c) r/w. Section 18(1) & (2)
of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010)

IN THE MATTER OF:

GOPAL KHANDELWAL & ORS ………APPLICANT

VERSUS
NAGAR NIGAM MATHURA- VRINDAVAN & ORS
…RESPONDENTS

COMPILATION NO. I
(PAPER BOOK)
 INDEX

S.No. Particulars Page No.

COMPILATION-I
1. Application with Verification
and Affidavit
2. MA No. _____________of
2025
Application for Production of
Documents
3. MA No. _____________of
2025
Application for Stay
4. Vakalatnama
COMPILATION-II
5. ANNEXURE A-1
The True Copy of the News
Report dated
6. ANNEXURE A-2
The True Copy of the News
Report dated
7. ANNEXURE A-3
The True Copy of the News
Report dated
8. ANNEXURE A-4
The True Copy of the News
Report dated
9. ANNEXURE A-5
The True Copy of Study dated
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, SITTING
AT NEW DELHI
APPLICATION NO.______________OF 2013
(Under Section 14 & 15 (b) & (c) r/w. Section 18(1) & (2)
of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010)

IN THE MATTER OF:

National Green Tribunal Bar Association
Through Secretary,
Trikoot II
Bhikaji Cama Place
New Delhi ………
APPLICANT
VERSUS
1. State Level Environment Impact Assessment Author-
ity
Directorate of Environment, State of Uttar Pradesh
Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Paryavan Parisar,
Vineet Khand – I, Gomati Nagar
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
PIN - 226010
3. State of Uttar Pradesh
Through Chief Secretary,
Government of Uttar Pradesh
Secretariat, Lucknow -226001
New Delhi -110001
4. Geological Survey of India
3rd Floor, A wing,
Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi 110001, India

5. Department of Irrigation
Through Director
State of Uttar Pradesh
7. Central Pollution Control Board
Through Member Secretary
Parivesh Bhawan, CBD- Cum Office Complex
East Arjun Nagar, Delhi-110032

8. Uttar Pradesh State Pollution Control Board,

Through the Member Secretary
Picup Bhawan, 2nd floor, B- block
Vibhuti Khand, Gomiti Nagar,
Lucknow-226010

9. District Magistrate,
Mathura,
Uttar Pradesh
10.Superintendent of Police,
Mathura,
Uttar Pradesh.

11. ……RESPONDENTS

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE APPLICANT

ABOVENAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the address of the Applicants is as given above
for the service of notice of this Appeal.

2. That the addresses of the Respondents are as given

above for the service of notice of this Appeal.

3. That Present Application is being filed U/s 14 & 15 (b)

& (c) R/w section 18(1) & (2) of the National Green
Tribunal Act, 2010 (hereinafter, the ‘NGT Act’) by the
aggrieved persons, being persons interested in the
protection of the environment and ecology.

4. That the Present Application is being filed by the ap-

plicant against the rampant opening of Nalls in Yamuna
without requisite safety measures and/or in violation of
the conditions stipulated by government time to time, if
granted, which is affecting the integrity of the Yamuna
river system and the flood plain. The activity such ram-
pan opening of nalls is affecting the ecosystem and the
overall ecology of the Yamuna which is flowing through-
out Mathura, and thus there is substantial question relat-
ing to environment, wherein the community at large is
affected by the environmental consequences, which
needs to be decided by this Hon’ble Tribunal.

5. BRIEF FACTS:
5.1. That the rampant illegal sand mining in the Ya-
muna riverbed, is affecting the integrity of the Yamuna
river system and the flood plain. The activity of sand-
mining is adversely affecting the ecosystem and the
overall ecology of the area.
That those who have opposed to such sand-mining,
including the field level officials have been victimized as
is apparent from the newspaper reports.
Recently a man who had raised his voice against the
Sand Mafia, had been killed in his house by few goons in
the broad day light.

5.2. There have been several news reports and the

news otherwise is hovering in the media, after suspen-
sion of an upright SDM, Durga Shakti Nagpal, that she
has been made victim at behest of the Sand Mining
Mafia.
Excerpts from few of the reports are reproduced be-
low:

5.2.1. The Hindustan Times, Dated 2.08.2013:

“Due to her (Durga Shakti Nagpal) crackdown
against the sand mafia, the UP government
earned Rs. 54.3 lakh as fine in just five months.
“She got 17 FIRs lodged against the sand mining
mafia, seized 274 dumpers, four earthmoving
machines and four dozen tractors,” said an
official.”
The True Copy of the News Report dated 2.08.2013,
Published in Hindustan Times is annexed herewith and
marked as ANNEXURE - A-1.

5.2.2. The Hindustan Times, dated 2.08.2013:

“IAS officer Durga Shakti Nagpal is not the only
one Greater Noida’s sand mafia is after. Ashish
Kumar, the district mining officer who was helping
Nagpal in her drive against illegal mining,
survived three attempts on his life before being
transferred to UP’s Bulandshahr on July 25, two
days before Nagpal was suspended.
The True Copy of the News Report dated 2.08.2013,
Published in Hindustan Times is annexed herewith and
marked as ANNEXURE - A-2.

5.2.3. India Today, dated 2.08.2013:

“Between midnight and dawn, dozens of trucks
use this track that runs along the Yamuna before
it terminates close to the sandy river bed.
Things were just as some antisand mining
activists had said. In 15 minutes, Mail Today saw
more than a dozen trucks moving in and out. A
significant number of labourers were also walking
out of the area, coming out in batches of two or
three. One labourer explained, "Many of us come
here after midnight in search of work. often truck
and dumper operators give us between Rs.200 to
Rs.400 for three to five hours at night to load reta
(sand)."
The True Copy of the News Report dated 2.08.2013,
Published in India Today is annexed herewith and
marked as ANNEXURE - A-3.

5.3. That sand is critical to maintain the ecology of a

river system. This has been repeatedly highlighted by
several environmentalists and activists. A recent news-
paper article appeared in The Hindu dated 2.08.2013
outlines some of these opinions. Which are reproduced
as under:
“Sand is important for ground water recharge, on
a riverbed it acts as a link between the flowing
river and the water table and is part of the
aquifer,” said Manoj Misra of the NGO Yamuna Jiye
Abhiyan.
Illegally dredged sand, Mr. Misra said, is
equivalent to robbing water. “Sand holds a lot of
water, and when it is mindlessly mined and laden
on to trucks, large quantities of water is lost in
 transit.”
The negative impact of illegal sand mining far
outweighs the economic benefits, pointed out
Himanshu Thakkar of the South Asia Network on
Dams, Rivers and People. “There is a perception
that sand and boulders are useless and rivers
have a lot of sand. This is incorrect, because they
are crucial for the sustained existence of the river
and perform many functions.”
“We have seen the impact of tampering with the
rivers and their resources in the recent
Uttarakhand floods. When sand and boulders are
removed in an unimpeded way using heavy
machines, the erosion capacity of the river
increases. Sand and boulders prevent the river
from changing the course and act as a buffer for
the riverbed.” Mr. Thakkar added: “In
Vishnuprayag the boulders that came down with
the river water damaged a side of the dam and
the waters spread out across causing heavy
damage.”
Unplanned and rampant removal of sand from
riverbeds also amounts to destroying the habitat
of biodiversity, Mr. Misra said. “There are a lot of
micro-organisms that are not visible and widely
known, but are critical to soil structure and
fertility. When we dredge sand, we literally take
away their habitat,” he said, adding: “It is
estimated that in Noida and Greater Noida alone
the loss to the exchequer is about Rs.1,000 crore,
but the impact that sand mining, which is simply
put theft on environment and ecology, cannot
even be calculated.”
The True Copy of the News Report dated 2.08.2013,
Published in The Hindu is annexed herewith and marked
as ANNEXURE - A-4.
5.4. That there has also been an academic study, on
the Environment Impact related to the Sand Mining,
which show that sand mining impacts the environment
and ecology in several ways. A study published in a sci-
ence journal indicates, as follows:
“In-stream mining of sand and gravels can reduce
water quality as well as degrade the channel bed
and banks. The mining of these aggregates on the
floodplain can affect the water table and alter the
land-use. The impacts of sand mining from a river
is as follows

1. Habitat and Aesthetic Beauty Degradation - The

extraction of gravel from upland areas involves
the clearing of vegetation to expose the material.
This degrades the habitat of many organisms and
the aesthetic beauty of the natural environment.

2. Land Use Change - Sand and gravel mining

activities disrupt the ecological functions of
natural ecosystems in various ways such as
alteration of food chains. Extraction of sand and
gravel from the floodplains alters the functionality
of both the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems
culminating in further changes in land-uses.
Stagnant water in the excavation pits creates a
good breeding ground for disease carrying
vectors.

3. River System Degradation - A careful

consideration of the river's production level is
necessary before the mining because a slight
failure may lead to persistent recurrence of the
impacts on the river system. The extraction of
sand and gravel from river and stream terraces,
flood plains, and channels conflicts with other
resources, such as fisheries, aesthetics,
recreational functions and with the stability of the
river channels.

The collapsing of river banks increases the

sediment load and the magnitude of
sedimentation as well as the turbidity downstream
of the collapsed banks. This results in the
disturbance of feeding systems of fish species
which require ability to see for feeding.

4. Floodplain Ponding: The transforming of

riparian land into open pits is observed in
floodplain mining. The pits and adjacent the river
share the water table and this poses a risk of
pollution to the river if the pit is contaminated,
and also may contaminate ground water. The
contaminated water may sometimes contain
nutrients which will increase nutrient level of the
water leading to eutrophication, algal blooms
which results in rising of BOD levels.

5. Riparian Zone Degradation - Stockpiles along

the river, overburdens the river banks and alter
the channel hydraulics during high flows. The
stockpiles increase local erosion thereby
increasing sedimentation in the channel.
Overburdening the river banks can cause the
banks to collapse as a result of added weight.

Riparian zone degradation is caused by the need

to create space for stockpiles and haul roads.
Creation of haul roads results in the formation of
bare tracks compacted by vehicle wheels. During
rainfall, rain water follows these tracks in
concentrated flow causing erosion. The eroded
material increases sedimentation, turbidity and
deposition of pollutants in the river.
 Sand mining imposes pressure on the biological
communities thriving in the river environments.
The riparian zone acts as resting and nesting
ground for many migratory birds and destruction
of this valuable area affects those migratory birds

The True Copy of Study dated 2.08.2013, is annexed

herewith and marked as ANNEXURE - A-5.

5.5. That the Hon’ble Supreme Court, also took note of

the adverse effects of sand mining in its Order dated 27
February, 2012 in Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana,
(2012) 4 SCC 629:
“Sand mining on either side of the rivers,
upstream and in-stream, is one of the causes for
environmental degradation and also a threat to
the biodiversity. Over the years, India’s rivers and
Riparian ecology have been badly affected by the
alarming rate of unrestricted sand mining which
damage the ecosystem of rivers and the safety of
bridges, weakening of river beds, destruction of
natural habitats of organisms living on the river
beds, affects fish breeding and migration, spells
disaster for the conservation of many bird
species, increases saline water in the rivers etc.
Extraction of alluvial material from within or near
a streambed has a direct impact on the stream’s
physical habitat characteristics. These
characteristics include bed elevation, substrate
composition and stability, in-stream roughness
elements, depth, velocity, turbidity, sediment
transport, stream discharge and temperature.
Altering these habitat characteristics can have
deleterious impacts on both in-stream biota and
the associated riparian habitat. The demand for
sand continues to increase day by day as building
 and construction of new infrastructures and
expansion of existing ones is continuous thereby
placing immense pressure on the supply of the
sand resource and hence mining activities are
going on legally and illegally without any
restrictions. Lack of proper planning and sand
management cause disturbance of marine
ecosystem and also upset the ability of natural
marine processes to replenish the sand.

5.6. That sand is included in the definition of “minor

mineral” as defined in clause (e) of Section 3 of Mines
and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957,
and that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its Order dated
27 February, 2012 in Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana,
(2012) 4 SCC 629, held as under:

“leases of minor mineral including their renewal

for an area of less than five hectares be granted
by the States/Union Territories only after getting
environmental clearance from the MoEF.”

5.7. It is submitted that the State Authorities have not

taken adequate measures to ensure that such illegal
mining is not carried on without prior environment clear-
ance.

5.8. That the State Authorities have also failed to initi-

ate stringent action against the project proponent for vi-
olation and non compliance of the EIA Notification and
the clearance conditions.

5.9. That despite the fact that these have been

brought to the notice of the authorities, such activities
are continuing unabated.

6. That in view of the aforesaid facts and condition, the

National Green Tribunal, is filing the present application
on following amongst other grounds which the applicant
may take at the time of hearing after craving leave of
this Hon’ble Tribunal:

GROUNDS
A. Because the illegal sand mining is being carried on in
gross violation of the environmental laws and more
specifically the various orders of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court passed in SLP (C) No.19628-19629 OF 2009.

B. Because illegal activities are being carried out by the

project proponent in gross violation of laws and environ-
mental principles.

C. Because it is the duty of the State Environment Im-

pact Assessment Authority to ensure that the objective
of the EIA Notification 2006 is upheld in letter and in
spirit. The Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana has
held in Vijay Bansal and Others v. State of Haryana and
Others [CWP No.20134 of 2004, date of decision 15 May
2009]:

“[40]. The Central or the State Governments are,

therefore, under an accented legal obligation to
ensure that the pressures of the changing needs
do not trespass the balancing principles of
'sustainable development'. In our view, the
notification dated 14.9.2006 is also a leap towards
performance of such duties entrusted to the
Central Govt. under the 1986 Act. Similarly, it is
imperative upon the enforcing authorities
constituted or notified under the Central Acts to
monitor the scheduled activities and ensure that
no one tampers with the legislative intentment
behind these Acts.”

The State Environment Impact Assessment Authority

should monitor the compliance of the conditions
stipulated in the environment clearance letter and
initiated stringent action against the project proponent
in case of failure of implementation of the said
conditions.

D. Because the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held

in several cases that the principle of precaution under
the international law is now part of the Indian municipal
law. In Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India
1996 (5) SCC 647, the Court held that the Precautionary
Principle in the municipal law context means –

‘(i) Environment measures - by the State

Government and the statutory Authorities - must
anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of
environmental degradation.

(ii) Where there are threats of serious and

irreversible damage lack of scientific certainly
should not be used as the reason for postponing,
measures to prevent environmental degradation.

(iii)The "Onus of proof" is on the actor or the

developer/ industrial to show that his action is
environmentally benign.’

It is submitted that in the present case the respondent

authorities have failed and/or have intentionally not
implemented the precautionary principle. It is submitted
that there would be an irreversible damage to the
ecology and environment and would cause long term
environmental degradation, if the illegal activities are
carried on with the help of State Machinery is not
prevented.

E. Because the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, in

Section 20 requires that the Tribunal should apply the
principles of sustainable development, the precautionary
principle and polluter pays principle in its orders, deci-
sions and awards.

F. Because there has been series of violations, by the

project proponent which have caused serious adverse
impacts on the environment and therefore in view of the
polluter pays principle’ the project proponent shall be
held liable to make good the loss caused to the Environ-
ment, Ecology and the Properties.

G. Because in M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and others

(2000) 6 SCC 213, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed
as under: “…pollution is a civil wrong. By its very nature,
it is a tort committed against the community as a whole.
A person, therefore, who is guilty of causing pollution,
has to pay damages (compensation) for restoration of
the environment and ecology. He has also to pay dam-
ages to those who have suffered loss on account of the
act of the offender.” It held further that “In addition to
damages aforesaid, the person guilty of causing pollu-
tion can also be held liable to pay exemplary damages
so that it may act as a deterrent for others not to cause
pollution in any manner.”

H. Because the Respondent State Authorities have failed

and/or have intentionally not taken appropriate legal ac-
tion against the project proponent and thus have abet-
ted and willfully connived in allowing such illegal sand
mining, in complete violation of the environmental and
other applicable laws.

7. LIMITATION

7.1. That the Present Application is being filed, against

the illegal sand mining activities being carried on in the
River Bed of Yamuna, and since the same is continuing
everyday, it is a continuing violation of the provisions of
enactment specified in Schedule 1 of the National Green
Tribunal Act, 2010, and thus the present Application is
well within limitation.

PRAYER
In view of the above facts and circumstances it is most
respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal may be
pleased to:

a. Direct the Respondent Authorities to take appropriate

legal action against all Sand Mining, being carried on
without seeking prior environment clearance or in
violation of the conditions prescribed in the Environment
Clearance, if granted, and report the same to this
Hon’ble Tribunal;

b. Direct the Respondent Authorities to formulate and

place on record strategy/scheme to prevent illegal
mining.

c. Direct the Respondent Authorities to conduct a

cumulative impact study on rampant sand mining in the
State.

d. Pass any such other or further order as this Hon’ble

Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and cir-
cumstances of the case.

APPLICANT