Environment & Ecology | GS III
The Supreme Court has clarified that its February
2024 interim order requiring prior approval before
mining within a 10-km radius of the Asan Wetland
Conservation Reserve would apply, for parity, to
similarly notified Wetland Conservation Reserves
across India.
• Asan Wetland Conservation Reserve lies at
the confluence of the Asan and Yamuna
rivers in Uttarakhand.
• Declared a Ramsar Site in 2020.
• Important habitat for migratory
waterbirds and rich aquatic biodiversity.
What did the Supreme Court direct?
• The Court directed that:
o No mining should take place within
10 km of the Asan Wetland
Conservation Reserve unless prior
permission is obtained from:
▪ Standing Committee of the
National Board for Wildlife
(NBWL), or
▪ Ministry of Environment,
Forest and Climate Change
(MoEFCC).
• The Court clarified that this principle would
apply to similarly notified Wetland
Conservation Reserves elsewhere in the
country.
Current issue:
• The State of Himachal Pradesh argued that
the 2024 order should not apply because
part of the Asan reserve lies outside
Uttarakhand.
• It also argued that wetland conservation
reserves do not have a statutory buffer
zone unlike national parks and wildlife
sanctuaries.
• The Supreme Court rejected this narrow
interpretation and applied the principle of
parity.
What are Ramsar Sites?
• Wetlands designated under the Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands.
• Convention adopted at Ramsar, Iran (1971).
• Promotes conservation and wise use of
wetlands.
• India became a Party in 1982.
• August 2026: Gala Lake (Arunachal Pradesh)
became India's 101st Ramsar Site.
Does Ramsar status create a mining buffer?
• Neither the Ramsar Convention nor the
Wetlands (Conservation and Management)
Rules, 2017 creates a statutory buffer zone
around Ramsar sites.
• Ramsar designation recognises international
ecological importance but protection is implemented through domestic
environmental laws.
What does the Indian law say about mining in
wetlands?
• Wetlands Rules, 2010
o Listed prohibited activities within
wetlands.
o Required prior approval for activities
within the wetland's zone of influence.
o Mandated Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for specified
projects.
• Wetlands Rules, 2017
o Replaced the earlier framework.
o Shifted regulation largely to State
Wetland Authorities.
o Removed the explicit list of prohibited
activities contained in the 2010 Rules.
o Validity of these Rules is currently
under challenge before the Supreme
Court.
• How is this different from National Parks
and Wildlife Sanctuaries?
• Mining restrictions around protected forests
and wildlife habitats are governed through statutes and Supreme Court directions.
Why is the judgement significant?
• Clarifies the legal status of Ramsar wetlands.
• Harmonises protection across similarly
notified Wetland Conservation Reserves.
• Strengthens precautionary environmental
governance.
• Prevents ecological degradation from nearby
mining.
• Reinforces judicial oversight over
environmentally sensitive areas.
• Balances development with ecological
conservation.
• Highlights the distinction between
international recognition and domestic
statutory protection.
Conclusion: The Supreme Court's clarification strengthens judicial
safeguards for ecologically important wetlands. Long
term conservation, however, requires a clear and
consistent statutory framework that complements
India's international commitments under the Ramsar Convention.