Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued notices to the Central Government, Chhattisgarh Government, Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited (RRVUNL) and the District-Level Forest Rights Committee, Surguja in a case concerning the PEKB coal block in Chhattisgarh’s Hasdeo Aranya, where a dispute has arisen over the Community Forest Rights of villagers and mining activities.
The petition has been filed by the Hasdeo Aranya Bachao Sangharsh Samiti and six other petitioners, challenging the Chhattisgarh High Court’s April 21, 2026 judgment.
The Supreme Court has not stayed the ongoing mining activities in the PEKB coal block. It has clarified that the issuance of notices will not affect the existing mining operations being carried out by RRVUNL.
The matter was heard by a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana.
Ghatbarra Villagers’ Forest Rights at the Centre
The main issue before the Supreme Court concerns the Community Forest Rights of Ghatbarra village residents under the Forest Rights Act.
The petitioners claim that the villagers were granted Community Forest Rights, which were later cancelled.
They have challenged the cancellation and subsequent mining-related approvals, alleging that the legal safeguards under the Forest Rights Act and the role of the Gram Sabha were not properly followed.
Rajasthan Power Company’s Link to PEKB
The Parsa East and Kente Basan (PEKB) coal block is allocated to Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited.
This connects the dispute in Chhattisgarh directly with Rajasthan’s power company and its electricity requirements.
Mining under Phase-I has been completed, while Phase-II received approval in February 2022.
The petitioners have also questioned the later approvals related to mining in the area.
Chhattisgarh HC Had Rejected the Challenge
The Supreme Court case arises from the April 21, 2026 judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which dismissed the appeal filed by the Hasdeo Aranya Bachao Sangharsh Samiti and others.
Earlier, a single judge had rejected their challenge against the continuation of mining-related approvals in the PEKB coal block.
The High Court held that matters already finally decided could not be reopened through another route.
High Court Relied on Res Judicata
The High Court relied on the principle of res judicata, under which an issue that has already been finally decided generally cannot be litigated again between the same parties.
The High Court also noted that the petitioners had not directly challenged certain earlier orders, including forest clearances issued in 2011 and 2012 and the March 28, 2012 forest diversion order.
Petitioners Challenge Cancellation of Forest Rights
Before the Supreme Court, the petitioners argue that if the villagers had valid Community Forest Rights, those rights could not have been cancelled without following the safeguards under the Forest Rights Act.
They have also argued that the traditional rights of tribal communities and the role of the Gram Sabha cannot be ignored.
The petitioners further contend that the environmental, cultural and social impact of forest destruction cannot be addressed merely through monetary compensation.
Supreme Court Seeks Responses
The Supreme Court has sought responses from all the concerned authorities on the issues raised in the petition.
The Court will examine whether the residents of Ghatbarra had Community Forest Rights and, if those rights existed, what legal measures can be taken to enforce them.
Mining Continues For Now
The Supreme Court has not imposed any stay on the ongoing PEKB mining activities.
The Court has specifically clarified that the notice issued in the case will not affect the existing mining activities of RRVUNL.
Therefore, the mining operations will continue for now.
Final Decision Yet to Come
At this stage, the Supreme Court has only issued notices and sought responses from the concerned authorities.
It has not yet decided whether the Ghatbarra villagers have the disputed Community Forest Rights, nor has it cancelled or stopped the PEKB mining activities.
The matter will proceed after the respondents file their replies before the Supreme Court.