Environment Law

Module 1

A. Environmental Law: International and National Perspective- NEEDS TO BE

CHECKED
B. Introduction-Environment – Meaning
C. Environment Pollution – Meaning and Issues;
D. International Norms-Sustainable Development, Precautionary Principle,
Polluter pays Principle, Public Trust Doctrine;
E. Constitutional Guidelines-Right to Wholesome Environment – Evolution and
Application, NEEDS TO BE CHECKED
F. Relevant Provisions – Art. 14, 19 (1) (g), 21, 48-A, 51-A(g),
G. Environment Protection through Public Interest Litigation

Environmental Law: International and

National Perspective
https://lexpeeps.in/environmental-protection-national-and-international-perspective/

Introduction-Environment – Meaning
The environment has been defined as that outer physical and biological system in
which man and other organisms live as a whole. Human environment consists of
both physical environment and biological environment. Physical environment covers
land, water and air. Biological environment includes plants, animals and other
organisms.

‘Environment’ defined under 2(a) of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986,

‘Environment’ includes Water, air and land and the inter-relationship which exists
among and between, water, air, land, and human beings, other living creatures,
plants, microorganisms and property.[1]

The term environment is derived from a French word ‘Environia” which means to
surround. Thus, etymologically environment means ‘surrounding conditions,
circumstances affecting people’s life.[2]

‘Environment’ includes water, air and land and the inter-relationship which exist
among and between water, air, land and human beings, other living creatures,
plants, micro-organisms and property.[3]
It includes the complex physical, chemical and biological factors surrounding an
organism or an ecological community. Such factors act and interact with various
species and organisms to affect their form, growth and survival. Any unfavourable
alteration of this environment is called environmental pollution. Air, water, land,
radiation and thermal are the common type of pollution.
INTRODUCTION-
https://www.lloydlawcollege.edu.in/blog/environmental-
law.html#:~:text=Environmental%20Law%20can%20be%20explained,both
%20present%20and%20future%20generations.

Environment Pollution – Meaning and Issues

The main environmental issues faced in India are pollutions namely air pollution,
water pollution, noise pollution, disposing chemical waste improperly, leakage of
harmful gases, etc. are just few among the environmental problems.
Pollutions refer to imbalance caused in the environment through the actions of
humans. This imbalance can lead to health-related issues which can affect the future
generations. It is caused by man-made activities. It is necessary to protect the
environment because the present generations are mere care-takers of the future
generations. It is their responsibility to give the earth to the future in a proper and
healthy manner. Let us try to understand the different types of pollution and their
effects on the environment.
Air Pollution:
“Air pollution is the release of pollutants such as gases, particles, biological
molecules, etc. in to the air that is harmful to human health and the environment.” In
other words, it refers to the contamination of air by harmful gases, dust and smoke
which affect biotic and abiotic things. It is necessary to maintain the correct amount
of gases present in the atmosphere such as 78% of nitrogen, 21% of oxygen and the
remaining is other gases. When there is an increase of other gases in the
atmosphere it can result in global warming, ozone layer depletion, cancer diseases,
breathing issues, skin problems, acid rains, asthma, etc.
For example: Delhi is the existing example of air pollution. It causes a new weather
in Delhi know as smog which is a mixture of smoke (emitted from vehicles, factories
and other sources) and fog. It causes serious health issues for the people living
there.
Noise/Sound Pollution
Noise pollution refers to that unwanted sound that interferes with a person’s
peaceful existence. India is a developing country. Movement of people and goods for
such economic and urban development is necessary. As a result, there is immense
noise produced by the trains, buses, vehicles, trucks, airplanes, huge rallies for
various reasons, etc. In residential areas we can see loud music played by residents.
High noises levels can lead to cardiovascular and permanent hear impairment. It can
even cause change in the behavioural aspect of a person. It can cause stress, lack of
sleep, and other harmful effects on the health of an individual. Moreover, this earth
not only belongs to humans. Loud noises can frighten animals as well; it can cause
sudden heart attacks to such animals.

Water Pollution
Water pollution is the contamination of water bodies with man-made affluents,
chemicals, waste, etc. Such disposal is harmful for humans and the living organisms
in such water-bodies. There are instances of where the court has stopped an industry
from functioning due to improper disposable of waste in the locality. The effect of
water pollution often leads to death, skin rashes, pinkeye, respiratory infections,
tuberculosis, etc. Three-fourth of the Earth is covered with water. But less than 1% of
the earth’s freshwater is accessible to us.
Land Pollution
This pollution is on-process and the effects such pollution will be evident at an
unexpected situation. The land is abused and deteriorating constantly. This is caused
by the solid wastes, untreated chemical affluents, etc. In other words, it is the
degradation or destruction of the soil and groundwater.
Case Laws That Shaped Environmental Laws
1. Chipko Movement, 1973:
A major impact of the Chipko movement or the Chipko andolan was that it
prompted the Union government to amend the Indian Forest Act, 1927, and
introduced the Forest Conservation Act 1980, which says forest land cannot be used
for non-forest purpose.
 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
(AIR 1987 SC 1086) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 12739 of 1985
Shriram Food Fertilizer Case/ Oleum Gas Leak Case
This case deals with the leakage of oleum gas leaks on 4 th and 6th of December,
1985. This came immediately after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case where many people
died. As a result, there was a need to develop a new rule under Strict Liability
without exceptions. This came to be known as Absolute Liability. This case led to the
formation of Environment Protection Act, 1986.
 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
(AIR 1997 SC 734) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13381 of 1984
Taj Trapezium Case
The Supreme Court instructed the coal and coke industries that surrounded Taj
Mahal should take alternative measures or else they should shift their industries to
some other place. This measure was taken as a result of change in colour of India’s
famous tourist destination, Taj Mahal. At the same time the quality of air, water and
land started being harmful for the residents of the area. It was essential to protect
the rights of people enshrined in Article 21.
 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
(AIR 1988 SC 1037) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3727 of 1985
Ganga Pollution Case/ Kanpur Leather Tanneries Case
In 1985, M.C. Mehta filed a writ petition in the form of mandamus to prevent leather
tanneries from disposing of the domestic and industrial waste and effluents in the
Ganga River. The Supreme court stated that Article 51-A of the Constitution of India
imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen to protect and improve the natural
environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife. The Court also stated the
importance of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (the Water
Act). This act was passed to prevent and control water pollution and maintaining
water quality. This act established central and stated boards and conferred them
with power and functions relating to the control and prevention of water pollution.
 Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India
Writ Petition No. 967 of 1989
Ground Water Pollution Case
A PIL was filed under Article 32 for the violation of Article 21. Various protests
occurred over the presence of industries causing large scale environmental pollution
and endangering the lives of the villagers who resided in the vicinity of the
industries. The SC initiated instant action and ordered Central Govt to constitute
strict measures against the said industries. It upheld the doctrine of Absolute
Liability stating that the polluted environment must be restored to pollution free for
the healthy living by utilising anti-pollution scientific appliances. The industries were
liable for monetary damages for restoration of the environment.
 Vellore Citizen’s Welfare Forum v. Union of India
(AIR 1996 SC 2715) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 914 of 1991
Tamil Nadu Tanneries Case
The petition was filed against the excessive pollution caused by the tanneries and
other industries in the State of Tamil Nadu in the River Palar. This river is the main
source of drinking and bathing water for the surrounding people. The Supreme Court
directed that all attempts should be taken to improve the situation and guided all the
Tanneries to submit a Rs.10,000 as fine in the Collector’s office. The Court
additionally coordinated the State of Tamil Nadu to grant M. C. Mehta with an
entirety of Rs. 50,000 as gratefulness towards his endeavours for the security of the
Environment.
For Important Case Laws of Environmental Law, Click Here.
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-635-introduction-to-environmental-
law-in-india.html
https://lawbhoomi.com/introduction-to-environment-and-environmental-law/
#Environmental_Issues_Faced_in_India

International Norms-Sustainable
Development, Precautionary Principle,
Polluter pays Principle, Public Trust Doctrine
Environment can be defined as a sum of all the living and non-living elements and
their effects that influence human life. There have been several noxious exercises
that have taken place and therefore both the international and Indian legal systems
have uniformly improved laws and regulations centered on a set of key
environmental law doctrines. These principles are a) Sustainable Development b) the
Polluter Pays Principle c) Precautionary Principle d) Public Trust Doctrine e) Inter-
generational Equity .

Sustainable Development: –
The concept of sustainable development received its impetus in the Stockholm
Declaration on Human Environment resulting from the United Nations Conference on
Human Environment in 1972.
The term ‘sustainable development’ was used by the World Commission on
Environment and Development and the Brundtland Commission in its seminal 1987
report ‘Our Common Future’. The Brundtland report has given a very comprehensive
and universally accepted definition of sustainable development in the following
words:
“Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

In other words, sustainable development can also be defined as an integration of

development and environmental imperatives. To fall within the ambit of
sustainability, development must possess both economic and ecological
sustainability. The authors opine that sustainable development is essentially a policy
and strategy for continued economic and social development without detriment to
the environment and natural resources on the quality of which continued activity and
further development depend.

In the case of Vellore Citizen’s Welfare Forum v Union of India , the honorable
Supreme Court refused to accept the traditional concept that development and
ecology were opposed to each other and projected the relevance and importance of
the concept of sustainable development. The Apex Court emphatically held that
sustainable development has been accepted as a part of international customary
law.

Polluter Pays Principle: –

The polluter-pay principle states that an individual or enterprise polluting the
environment should pay a fine or penalty for degrading the environment, hence it is
their responsibility to reverse the damages caused to the environment by paying for
it.
The Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development has come up with this
principle (OECD). This principle finds its place also in the following instruments-
i) Brundtland report throws light on this principle.
ii) The Rio Declaration (principle 16) gives two-fold liability-
a) compensation to the victims of pollution and
b) ecological restoration.

In the case of Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India , this case is popularly known
as the hydrochloric case, the polluter threw a toxic sludge that was gypsum which
had seeped into the deep subterranean supply of water and aquifers which rendered
the drinking water for the villagers in Bichari unfit to drink and use it for cultivation.
The Apex Court held that the liability of the polluter to defray the costs of remedial
measures and directed the central government to determine the amount required for
remedial measures paid by the chemical manufacturing company, and the Supreme
Court accepted the Polluter Pays Principle as a universally accepted and a sound
principle.

Precautionary Principle: –
This principle is widely recognized as the most essential ‘Sustainable Development’
principle. Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration states, “To protect the environment,
states shall widely apply the precautionary approach according to their capabilities.”
Where there is a risk of substantial or permanent harm, a lack of complete scientific
confidence may not be utilized to postpone cost-effective environmental protection
actions. It is based on the idea that it is better to be safe than sorry and that the
burden of proof lies on the person or entity who wants to carry out the potentially
harmful activity, not on the person or entity who wants to prevent it.
This principle is based on three things
a) anticipate the threat to the environment
b) attack the threat and
c) prevent future threats.

In the case of MC Mehta v Union of India (CNG vehicle case) , the Supreme
Court ordered that all public transport vehicles in Delhi should be converted to utilize
compressed natural gas (CNG) instead of diesel to minimize air pollution and
preserve public health. The lawsuit was submitted by MC Mehta, an environmental
activist, who claimed that Delhi’s high levels of vehicle pollution infringed on the
right to life and a clean environment guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court relied on various studies and papers that demonstrated the negative
impacts of air pollution on human health and the environment and the advantages of
utilizing CNG as a cleaner and less expensive alternative fuel. The court also formed
an Environment Pollution Control Authority (EPCA) to oversee and carry out the
instructions. The case exemplifies judicial activism and the use of the precautionary
principle in environmental problems.

Public Trust Doctrine: –

The public trust doctrine is a concept that holds those specific natural resources,
such as water, air, forests, and animals, belong to the public and must be
safeguarded and protected by the state for the benefit of current and future
generations. The concept requires the state to act as a trustee of natural resources,
preventing their deterioration, depletion, or privatization. The theory also guarantees
the public the right to utilize and enjoy these resources appropriately and
sustainably. The public trust doctrine is an essential instrument for environmental
conservation and management because it offers a legal foundation for contesting the
states or private parties’ acts or inactions that jeopardize the integrity and
availability of public trust resources.

M.C Mehta v Union of India , also known as the Span Motel case this case was the
landmark case for the application of the public trust doctrine in India.
Also, in the case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India and Ors ,
the Supreme Court of India recognized and applied the public trust doctrine in this
case by stating that it is the state’s responsibility to act as the trustee of the natural
resources for the welfare of the public and ascertain that the citizens should
sustainably use these natural resources.
The court also observed that the public trust doctrine is a part of the Indian
environmental jurisprudence and is derived from the constitutional provisions, such
as Article 21 (right to life), Article 48A (duty of the state to protect the environment),
and Article 51A (g) (duty of the citizens to protect the environment). The court held
that the public trust doctrine is not only applicable to traditional natural resources
but also to modern resources, such as air quality, which are essential for the survival
and well-being of the people.

Constitutional Guidelines-
Right to Wholesome Environment – Evolution and
Application
https://legalvidhiya.com/right-to-wholesome-environment-evolution-and-
application/#_ftn2
read this if you don’t understand the below

The article begins with a brief on Article 21 as it guarantees personal life which in
turn includes right to wholesome environment. A few case laws have been discussed
in brief to understand the ambit of the article. The next part of the article deals with
an introduction on right to wholesome environment. The evolution of the same has
been depicted through various case laws and formation of various laws.
The connection between Article 21 and a healthy environment highlights the
importance of protecting life. Environmental quality affects health and life
expectancy, making clean surroundings a fundamental right.
Article 21 reads, “Protection of life and personal liberty No person shall be deprived
of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
In Part III of the Indian constitution, which deals with the fundamental rights provided
to citizens, the right to a healthy environment or any other right related to the
environment is not expressly protected. But remember to follow the rules that the
Supreme Court has set. Article 21’s application has been widened to cover the right
to a healthy environment as a result of the law’s increased reach.
The right to a healthy environment is recognized as a fundamental right under
Article 21. This principle was underscored by Jayanthi Natrajan, then Union Minister
of State for Environment and Forests in 2012. According to Section 2 of the
Environmental Protection Act of 1986, air, water, land, humans, and animals are all
integral parts of the environment. The term "healthy environment" encompasses
safe and conducive living conditions for humans.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of
Uttar Pradesh, expanded the interpretation of Article 21 to include the right to a
healthy environment as essential to life and personal liberty. Similarly, in Subhash
Kumar v. State of Bihar, the Court emphasized that the expansive meaning of "life"
in Article 21 encompasses environmental protection. These cases established the
right to a healthy environment as a crucial aspect of fundamental rights in India.
EVOLUTION

1) Dehradun Quarrying Case (Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra &

Ors. v. State of UP, 1985):

 Supreme Court ruled that quarrying causing contamination must stop as it

violates Article 21.
 Established the right to a healthy environment as part of the right to life and
personal liberty.

2) Ratlam Municipality v. Vardhichand, 1980:

 Court affirmed that a pollution-free environment is essential under Article 21.

 Highlighted issues caused by negligent town planning and private polluters.

3) 42nd Amendment to the Constitution:

 Consolidated Article 51A, directing citizens to protect and improve the natural
environment.
 Environmental Protection Act of 1986 operationalizes this directive.

4) Legislative Framework:

 Laws like Air Act (1981), Water Act (1974), Wildlife Act (1972), Forest
Conservation Act (1980), and Biological Diversity Act (2002) aim to protect
and enhance the environment.

5) Health Concerns:

 Research indicates hazards from poor air quality (carbon dioxide,

hydrocarbons, etc.) and noise pollution (miscarriages, hypertension).

6) Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana:

 Court emphasized living in a sanitary environment as crucial for a dignified

life under Article 21.

7) Sher Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh:

 Recognized citizens' fundamental right to a healthy, clean, and fair

environment.
 Emphasized the state's duty to ensure public welfare and security.

8) Summary:
  Courts have implied that Article 21 includes the right to a wholesome
environment.
 Individuals and government share responsibility for maintaining a clean and
healthy environment for dignified living.

Relevant Provisions – Art. 14, 19 (1) (g), 21, 48-A, 51-

A(g),
A. Directive Principles of State Policy
Article48-A: According to the article, “The State shall endeavour to safeguard the
country’s forests and wildlife, and to maintain and promote the environment.” It was
determined that residents of the nation had a basic right to a healthy, clean, and
decent environment in Sher Singh v. Himachal Pradesh.
Additionally, according to Article 47, one of the State’s fundamental responsibilities
is to “raise the level of nutrition, the standard of living, and the state of the public
health of its people.” Public health must be improved through environmental
protection and development.
B. Fundamental Duties
Article 51-A, Clause (g): This article addresses the fundamental obligations of
citizens, and indicates that it is the responsibility of every Indian citizen to preserve
and enhance the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and animals,
as well as to have compassion for all living things. As a result, both the State (Article
48-A) and every person (Article 51-A(g)) have a responsibility to preserve and
improve the natural environment.
C. Fundamental Right
The Right to a Clean Environment is one of the implied Fundamental Rights under
Fundamental Rights (Part-III) as established by the judiciary using Articles 14, 19, 21,
and 32.
According to Article 14 of the Constitution, everyone is entitled to equality before
the law and equal protection under the law. Article 14 implicitly imposes an
obligation on the state to exercise fairness in its environmental protection measures.
Article 19(1) has also been interpreted by the Supreme Court to address the threat
of noise pollution. In the PA Jacob case, 1993, the court upheld the position that
using loudspeakers or sound amplifiers is not protected under Article 19(1).
Additionally, Article 19(1)(g) grants citizens the basic right to engage in any
profession, trade, or business. However, this basic right is subject to reasonable
limitations, and citizens are not allowed to engage in commercial activities that pose
a risk to the environment’s health.
The Supreme Court has examined Article 21, which states that “no person shall be
deprived of his life or personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure
established by law.” The court has repeatedly ruled that this act inherently
guarantees the right to an environment, free from the threat of disease and
infection. In 1988’s Dehradun Quarrying Case, the Supreme Court declared that
the right to a healthy environment is a natural outcome of article 21. The
Environment Protection Act was invoked in this case, and the Supreme Court ordered
quarrying to cease. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled in Subhash Kumar v.
the State of Bihar that Article 21’s right to clean water and air, qualifies as a
fundamental right.

Environment Protection through Public Interest

Litigation
Public Interest Litigation is a legal mechanism that allows any person, organization,
or group to approach the court on behalf of the public or for the protection of public
interest. PIL in environmental law has been instrumental in promoting environmental
protection and conservation in India.
PIL can be filed against both public and private entities who are violating
environmental laws or causing harm to the environment. PIL is often used to address
issues related to environmental protection, pollution control, conservation of natural
resources, and sustainable development.
PIL helps to promote transparency and accountability in governance by holding
public authorities responsible for their actions or inactions regarding environmental
protection. PIL in environmental law has also helped to create awareness among
citizens about environmental issues and their rights. It has empowered people to
take action against environmental violations and seek redressal from the judiciary.
Illustrations of PIL in Environmental Protection
The Supreme Court of India has passed several landmark judgments of
environmental law in response to PILs filed by environmental activists and groups.
These judgments have resulted in the ban of hazardous industries, the closure of
polluting factories, and the implementation of various pollution control measures.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs.
Union of India, issued a warning to industries that discharge dangerous substances
like Oleum and H acid. The court stated that such pollution is a violation of the right
to a safe and healthy environment and, ultimately, the right to life.
Similarly, in the case of M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court
declared that vehicular emissions causing air pollution in Delhi constitute a violation
of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court directed all
commercial vehicles operating in Delhi to switch to CNG fuel mode to safeguard the
health of the public.
Moreover, in Church of God (Full Gospel) in India vs. KKR Majestic Colony
Welfare Association, the Supreme Court ruled that noise pollution amounts to a
violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.