Why did the Jharkhand High Court dismiss the brick kiln owners' petitions?

The court dismissed the petitions because it recognized the environmental damage caused by brick kiln operations and upheld the state's right to levy environmental taxes and contributions.

What is the purpose of the DMFT fund in Jharkhand?

The DMFT fund in Jharkhand is established to compensate for the environmental damage caused by mining operations and to work for the welfare of areas impacted by such activities.

Does the removal of soil for brick making constitute mining in Jharkhand?

Yes, the Jharkhand High Court ruled that soil used for brick making is considered a minor mineral, and its extraction is an integral part of brick manufacturing with environmental consequences.

Home / Environment / Jharkhand Court Upholds Environmental Taxes on Brick Kilns

Jharkhand Court Upholds Environmental Taxes on Brick Kilns

19 Jan

•

Summary

Court dismissed petitions challenging environmental taxes on brick kilns.
Soil removal for brick making impacts environment, court noted.
DMFT contributions are for compensating environmental damage from mining.

Jharkhand Court Upholds Environmental Taxes on Brick Kilns

The Jharkhand High Court has dismissed a batch of 16 petitions filed by brick kiln owners in East Singhbhum challenging the imposition of environmental taxes. The bench, comprising Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Arun Kumar Rai, observed that "the entire world is facing a serious problem of environmental degradation due to indiscriminate development."

The court upheld the levies, including District Mineral Foundation Trust (DMFT) contributions, management fees, and environmental cess. It highlighted that the removal of soil, a raw material for bricks, has adverse environmental impacts, including water and air pollution, thus justifying the need for DMFT fund deposits to compensate for the ecological damage.

This ruling reinforces the principle that mines and minerals are natural resources, and states are custodians with citizens accountable for maintaining environmental balance for sustainable development. The court emphasized that environmental protection is a global necessity and statutory mandates aim to preserve environmental balance alongside development.