G.R. No. 236269 - Concerned Citizens of Sta. Cruz, Zambales vs. Paje

Petitioners: Concerned citizens of Sta. Cruz, Zambales (CCOS), represented by their Chairperson Dr. Benito E. Molino and Pastor Edgardo C. Obra, along with numerous members and residents of Infanta, Pangasinan.
Respondents: Officials of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), Environmental Management Bureau (EMB), various local government officials of Sta. Cruz and Zambales, and several mining companies including Benguet Corporation Nickel Mines, Inc. (BNMI), Eramen Minerals, Inc. (EMI), LnL Archipelago Minerals, Inc. (LAMI), Zambales Diversified Metals Corporation (ZDMC), and Shangfil Mining & Trading Corporation (SMTC).

Petitioners filed a special civil action for the issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan and prayed for a Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) to enjoin nickel mining operations in Sta. Cruz, Zambales, alleging violation of their constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology.
They alleged unsystematic and environmentally destructive mining operations causing:

Flooding and muddy siltation from nickel laterite during Typhoon Labuyo in 2013, contaminating farmlands, rivers, shorelines, and fishponds.
Destruction of ecosystems in Sta. Cruz, Candelaria (Zambales), and Infanta (Pangasinan).
Water, air, and soil pollution; heavy siltation; forest denudation; soil erosion; worsened flood problems; destruction of irrigation systems, and adverse impact on local livelihoods.

Despite suspensions ordered by MGB in July 2014, petitioners alleged continuous mining activities by respondent companies.
Petitioners accused respondents of failing to comply with and enforce mandates under:

Republic Act No. 7942 (Mining Act of 1995), including requirements on environmental impact assessment (Section 70) and rehabilitation (Section 71).
DENR Administrative Order (DAO) No. 2010-21 on implementing rules and regulations.
Executive Order No. 192 (1987) regarding DENR's mandate and functions.
Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160).

The Supreme Court issued the Writ of Kalikasan, directing respondents to file verified returns and referred the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) for hearing.
CA issued a Writ of Continuing Mandamus against local government units to enforce environmental laws and set hearings for the TEPO application.
DENR and MGB issued various Cease and Desist Orders and suspension orders against respondent mining companies in 2014 and 2015 due to environmental violations, subject to specific conditions.
Despite orders, petitioners maintained that mining companies continued operations and that public officials failed to enforce regulations adequately.
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing public respondents, opposed the application for TEPO, asserting that the mining operations were suspended under Joint Suspension Orders issued in July 2016, rendering the petition moot.
On February 8, 2017, then DENR Secretary Regina Lopez issued separate orders canceling the Mineral Production Sharing Agreements (MPSA) of the respondent mining companies, effectively closing their operations.
Petitioners filed motions for ocular inspection alleging continued mining activities despite suspension and closure orders.
The CA, through Resolutions dated May 22 and December 14, 2017, denied the petitioners’ application for writ of kalikasan, TEPO, and motions, lifting the writ of kalikasan based on the closure of mining operations.

DENR rescinded or lifted closure orders starting 2019–2021, allowing mining companies (LAMI, BNMI, EMI, and ZDMC) to resume operations.
Appeals of mining companies against the cancellation orders remain pending before the Office of the President (OP), with Stay Orders issued.
Petitioners alleged resumption of mining activities despite closure orders, requesting further judicial intervention.

Whether the petition for writ of kalikasan and application for TEPO have been rendered moot by the closure of respondent mining companies following DENR cancellation orders.
Whether the lifting of the closure orders and resumption of mining operations affect the justiciability and merits of the petition for writ of kalikasan and duties of the courts to monitor compliance.