New Delhi: On 13 November 2025, the Supreme Court ordered that mining activities are now prohibited within national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and within one kilometre of them across India.
This decisive move comes in response to longstanding concerns over the impact of mining on fragile ecosystems and wildlife corridors.
Background of Supreme Court Mining Prohibition
Earlier, in the landmark Goa Foundation case, the Supreme Court had imposed a ban on mining within one kilometre of protected areas—but only with respect to the State of Goa.
Read Also: Massive Relief for Karnataka: Supreme Court Rules Tamil Nadu Cannot Block Mekedatu Dam Yet
In the present judgment in the T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India matter, the Court extended this restriction pan-India, recognising that what applies in one state must apply everywhere in order to protect all national parks and wildlife sanctuaries uniformly.
Importance of the Supreme Court Mining Prohibition Judgment
- Holistic protection for ecosystems: By establishing a clear 1 km buffer zone around national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, the ruling seeks to prevent environmentally destructive mining operations from encroaching on sensitive habitats.
- Unified national standard: The move ensures that all states and union territories adhere to the same legal benchmark, eliminating regional disparities in mining regulation around protected areas.
- Strengthening wildlife conservation: Mining has often fragmented habitats, disrupted migration routes and threatened flora and fauna. This ban could act as a strong deterrent.
- Legal clarity for states and industries: Governments and mining firms now have clearer guidelines, reducing ambiguity and litigation around buffer-zones and permissible activities.
Key Challenges to Watch
- Implementation at ground level: Enforcing the 1 km buffer uniformly across diverse terrains and jurisdictions may pose logistical and monitoring challenges.
- Existing mines and activities: Determining how to handle mining leases already granted within the prohibited zone will require clear transitional provisions and possibly compensation or alternate livelihoods.
- Balancing development and conservation: States dependent on mining revenue may face economic push-back; reconciling national resource extraction interests with conservation remains a complex task.
- Protecting forest-dweller rights: The Court also emphasised safeguarding the rights of tribal and forest-dweller communities under the Forest Rights Act, 2006. Ensuring that conservation measures do not harm livelihoods will be critical.
Key Implications of Supreme Court Mining Prohibition
For the mining industry: All states must immediately review mining leases within protected-area buffer zones; further approvals in these zones will now be impermissible.
For environmental governance: This judgement sets a precedent for stringent protection measures around ecologically sensitive zones and may lead to additional regulation in eco-sensitive zones (ESZs).
For biodiversity & climate goals: By limiting mining near protected areas, India strengthens its commitment to preserving biodiversity hotspots and supporting climate resilience.
For state administrations: States will need to align their mining, forest, and environment policies with the Court’s direction and ensure coordination between mining, environment and tribal/forest ministries.
Way Forward
Audit and map buffer-zones: States should conduct immediate audits of all mining leases within national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and their 1 km zones, map them precisely and initiate action.
Formulate transition plans: For existing mines in prohibited zones, governments should prepare transition remedies—either relocating operations, phasing them out, or offering compensation/training for affected workers.
Strengthen monitoring & enforcement: Use satellite imagery, GIS tools and on-ground inspections to monitor compliance and detect illegal mining near protected areas.
Inclusive conservation strategies: One must ensure that forest-dweller and tribal rights are factored into any conservation policy, aligning with the Forest Rights Act and community-based conservation approaches.
Promote sustainable alternatives: Encourage the mining industry and states to diversify into more sustainable economic activities in buffer zones—such as eco-tourism, forest-based value-chains or renewable-energy projects.
Read Also: Leopard Kills Jwala Cheetah’s Cub in Kuno National Park: Conflict Highlights Wildlife Challenges
