Can Stone Crusher Units Operate In Eco-Sensitive Zones? Supreme Court Allows Issue To Be Raised In Kerala HC

A bench comprising Justice KV Viswanathan and Justice NK Singh was hearing a special leave petition filed by M/s Alankar Granites challenging the order of the Kerala High Court, which vacated its earlier stay on the stop memos issued against the stone crushing unit.

On June 27, the Court today permitted the petitioner to withdraw the plea and move the High Court.

Earlier, the bench had sought the assistance of the amicus curiae in the forest batch matter (TN Godavarman Thirumalpad case) on considering the issue whether stone/metal crusher units can operate within the ESZ notified around protected forests.

The order recorded the following:

"After arguing for some time Mr. S.P. Chaly, learned senior counsel submits that he wants to withdraw the special leave petition with liberty to raise all contentions before the High Court, including the fact that the activity of stone crushing is not a prohibited activity and that in any event the location of the petitioner's unit is beyond the notified area.

We permit the learned senior counsel to raise all these contentions in the writ appeal."

During the hearing, Sr Advocate Shaji P Chaly, appearing for the petitioner emphasized that there is no final notification declaring the Chulannur Peafowl Sanctuary as a Wild Life Sanctuary.

He added that the petitioner's stone crushers are located at a distance of 1.6 Kms from the ESZ area. Sr Adv K Parameshwar appeared as the amicus in the matter.

The petitioner, the proprietor of a crusher unit based in Kerala, has contended that the restrictions imposed by the Supreme Court in ESZ areas would not apply to crusher units since they are not indulging in quarrying operations.

Chaly contended that the prohibition on mining activities in ESZ would not apply to crusher units. "It is only a crushing unit bringing metals from outside. And only crushing is done," Chaly submitted. He also contended that the unit was not falling within the ESZ area.

In June 2023, a single bench of the High Court dismissed the unit's challenge against the stop memos, relying upon the directions passed by the Supreme Court in 2022 and 2023 in the Godavarman case that "any activity, which is prohibited by both the guidelines as well as the ESZ notification shall strictly be prohibited." In writ appeal, the division bench passed an interim order in the unit's favour, staying the stop memos. However, in May 2025, the stay order was vacated by the division bench. Although the unit was at a distance of 1.6 KM from the Choolannur Pea Fowl Sanctuary, considering that there was a proposal to declare the area as a wild life sanctuary, the division bench passed the order. The division bench directed the authorities to stop the operation of the unit.

Case Details : M/S ALANKAR GRANITES v THIRUVILWAMALA GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND ORS.| SLP(C) No. 16999/2025