ENVIRONMENT LAW

LAW402

PROJECT

Topic: Protection of Environment through PIL and Citizen suit in India

 Date of Submission: 17/10/2020

SUBMITTED BY SUBMITTED TO

RAJ NARAYAN VERMA MR. MANI PRATAP

CUSB1713125035 School of Law and Governance
B.A LL.B (H), 2017-22 Assistant Professor
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At the outset, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude and thank to my Mentor, Professor,
and guide Mr. Mani Pratap (Assistant professor, School of law & Governance), for installing
confidence in me and entrusting the task to carry out a project on Protection of Environment
through PIL and Citizen suit in India. I am indeed privileged having being groomed in a
prestigious institution Central University of South Bihar, Gaya.

I would also like to express my gratitude to my friends for their support and help. My gratitude
also goes out to the staff and administration of Central University of South Bihar, Gaya for the
remote access to relevant materials that was a source of great help for the completion of this
project.

RAJ NARAYAN VERMA

CUSB1713125035

Seventh Semester

2017-22
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... - 1 -
Definition .............................................................................................................................................. - 1 -
Need For Environmental Laws .............................................................................................................. - 2 -
The Constitutional Aspects On Environmental Law.............................................................................. - 2 -
CONCEPT OF PIL ................................................................................................................................... - 3 -
Features of PIL ...................................................................................................................................... - 4 -
Public Interest Litigation (Procedure) ................................................................................................... - 4 -
ROLE OF PIL IN ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS............................................................................... - 5 -
EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IN INDIA ................................................. - 6 -
CITIZEN SUIT ......................................................................................................................................... - 7 -
Citizen Suit Provision In India ................................................................................................................ - 7 -
Citizen Suit (Procedure) ........................................................................................................................ - 8 -
SITUATION BEFORE THE INTRODUCTION OF CITIZEN SUIT PROVISION IN
ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATIONS................................................................................................... - 9 -
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) AND CITIZEN SUIT
PROVISION ........................................................................................................................................... - 10 -
IMPORTANT LANDMARK JUDGMENTS BY JUDICIARY ............................................................ - 11 -
SOME REMARKABLE PRINCIPLES AND DOCTRINES PROPOUNDED BY THE INDIAN
JUDICIARY:- ......................................................................................................................................... - 12 -
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................................... - 14 -
SUGGESTION & RECOMMENDATION ............................................................................................ - 14 -
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ - 16 -
INTRODUCTION

Environment is the wellspring of life on earth like water, air, soil, etc., and determines the
presence, development and improvement of humanity and all its activities. The concept of
ecological protection and preservation is not new. It has been intrinsic to many ancient
civilizations. Ancient India texts highlights that it is the dharma of each individual in the society
to protect nature and the term ‘nature’ includes land, water, trees and animals which are of great
importance to us. . In the ‘Atharva Veda’, the ancient Hindu Scepters stated “What of thee I dig
out let that quickly grow over”.1

At the same time, new innovations like, thermal power, atomic plant and so on without any
sufficient natural assurance pose another danger to the situations, the aftereffect of which results
in issues like global warming, climate change, acid rain, etc. Moreover, according to pattern of
Indian legislature to make a number of legislations as opposed to addressing the reason for
failure and disappointment, and passing new bills consistently is just like ‘old wine in new
bottle’. Therefore, there arises a requirement for a comprehensive analysis of the protection of
the environment. In recent years, there has been a sustained focus on the role played by the
higher judiciary in devising and monitoring the implementation of measures for pollution
control, conservation of forests and wildlife protection. Many of these judicial interventions have
been triggered by the persistent incoherence in policy-making as well as the lack of capacity-
building amongst the executive agencies. Devices such as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) have
been prominently relied upon to tackle environmental problems, and this approach has its
supporters as well as critics2. Recent law and economics literature has paid attention to a
phenomenon, which has mainly been developed by the Supreme Court of India, of allowing law
suits in the public interest, defined as Public Interest Litigation ("PIL").3

Definition4
“The word “environment” relates to surroundings. It includes virtually everything. It can be can
defined as anything which may be treated as covering the physical surroundings that are common
to all of us, including air, space, land, water, plants and wildlife”
“According to the Webster Dictionary, it is defined as the “Aggregate of all the external
condition and influences affecting the life and development of an organism.”

1
MC Mehta, GROWTH OF ENVIRONMENTAL JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIA, p.71, 1999.
2
Former Chief Justice Mr. K.G. Balakrishnan, THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN D.
P SHRIVASTAVA MEMORIAL LECTURE, p. 1, March 20,2010.
3
T.C.A. Anant & Jaivir Singh, An Economic Analysis of Judicial Activism, ECON. & POL. WKLY., Oct. 26, 2002, at 4433
(India).
4
https://legaljugaad.wordpress.com/2017/06/13/citizen-suit-provision-under-various-environmental-legislations/

-1-
“The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Section 2(a) environment “includes water, air and
land and the inter- relationship which exists among and between water, air and land, and human
beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organism and property.”

Need For Environmental Laws

In the hour of continuous industrialization and globalization, no one can overlook the damage
which is being caused Day to day innovation and advancement of technology, apart from
development additionally expands the risk to human life. Accordingly, there arises an intense
and an acute need of the law to keep pace with the need of the society along with individuals. So
now the question of environmental protection is a matter of worldwide concern, it is not confined
to any country or territory5.

The Constitutional Aspects On Environmental Law

The Indian Constitution is amongst the few in the world that contains specific provisions on
environment protection. The chapters directive principles of state policy and the fundamental
duties are explicitly enunciated the nation commitment to protect and improve the environment.
It was the first time when responsibility of protection of the environment imposed upon the states
through Constitution (Forty Second Amendment) Act, 19766.
Article 48-A the provision reads as follows: “The State shall endeavor to protect and improve the
environment and to safeguard the forest and wildlife of the country7.”

The Amendment also inserted Part VI-A (Fundamental duty) in the Constitution, which reads as
follows: Article 51-A (g) “It shall be duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the
natural environment including forests, lakes, and wildlife and to have compassion for living
creature.”

In Sachidanand Pandey v. State of West Bengal8, the Supreme Court observed “whenever a
problem of ecology is brought before the court, the court is bound to bear in mind Article 48-A
and Article 51-A (g).

5
https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/role-of-pil-in-environment-protection-in-india-by-pinky-
dass/#:~:text=Under%20the%20PIL%2C%20the%20judiciary,the%20state%2C%20organization%20or%20individual
.&text=Principles%20of%20International%20Environmental%20Law,S.K.
6
Contents on http://indianenvironmentalportal.org.in/
7
Of The Constitution of India,1950
8
AIR 1987 SC 1109

-2-
CONCEPT OF PIL

According to the jurisprudence of Article 32 of the Constitution of India, The right to move the
Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this
part is guaranteed.9 Ordinarily, only the aggrieved party has the right to seek redress under
Article32.

In S. P. Gupta v. Union of India10, The Supreme Court articulated the concept of PIL as
follows: Where a legal wrong or a legal injury is caused to a person or to a determinate class of
persons by reason of violation of any constitutional or legal right or any burden is imposed in
contravention of any constitutional or legal provision or without authority of law or any such
legal wrong or legal injury or illegal burden is threatened and such person or determinate class of
persons by reasons of poverty, helplessness or disability or socially or economically
disadvantaged position unable to approach the court for relief, any member of public can
maintain an application for an appropriate direction, order or writ in the High Court under Article
226 and in case any breach of fundamental rights of such persons or determinate class of
persons, in this court under Article 32 seeking judicial redress for the legal wrong or legal injury
caused to such person or determinate class of persons.

The Supreme Court in Indian Banks' Association, Bombay and ors v. M/s Devkala
Consultancy Service and Ors.11, held that: In an appropriate case, where the petitioner might
have moved a court in her private interest and for redressal of the personal grievance, the court in
furtherance of Public Interest may treat it a necessity to enquire into the state of affairs of the
subject of litigation in the interest of justice. Thus a private interest case can also be treated as
public interest case.

A new branch of proceedings known as 'Social Interest Litigation' or Public Interest

Litigation was evolved with a view to render complete justice to the aforementioned classes of
persona. It expanded its wings in course of time.

Public interest litigation has come to stay and its necessity cannot be overemphasized. The courts
evolved a jurisprudence of compassion. Procedural propriety was to move over giving place to
substantive concerns of the deprivation of rights. The rule of locus standi was diluted. The Court
in place of disinterested and dispassionate adjudicator became active participant in the
dispensation of justice.12

9
Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
10
1981 (Supp) SCC 87
11
J. T. 2004 (4) SC 587
12
V. Shantakumar, An economic emphasis of PIL in India, 2004.

-3-
Features of PIL
Through the mechanism of PIL, the courts seek to protect human rights in the following ways13:

1. By creating a new regime of human rights by expanding the meaning of fundamental right
to equality, life and personal liberty. In this process, the right to speedy trial, free legal aid,
dignity, means and livelihood, education, housing, medical care, clean environment, right
against torture, sexual harassment, solitary confinement, bondage and servitude,
exploitation and so on emerge as human rights. These new re-conceptualised rights
provide legal resources to activate the courts forth enforcement through PIL.

2. By democratization of access to justice. This is done by relaxing the traditional rule of

locus standi. Any public spirited citizen or social action group can approach the court on
behalf of the oppressed classes. Courts attention can be drawn even by writing a letter or
sending a telegram. This has been called epistolary jurisdiction.

3. By fashioning new kinds of relief's under the court's writ jurisdiction. For example, the
court can award interim compensation to the victims of governmental lawlessness. This
stands in sharp contrast to the Anglo-Saxon model of adjudication where interim relief is
limited to preserving the status quo pending final decision.

4. By judicial monitoring of State institutions such as jails, women's protective homes, juvenile
homes, mental asylums, and the like. Through judicial invigilation, the court seeks gradual
improvement in their management and administration.
5. By devising new techniques of fact-finding. In most of the cases the court has appointed its own
socio-legal commissions of inquiry or has deputed its own official for investigation.

Public Interest Litigation (Procedure)

(A) WHO CAN FILE: In India, any public-spirited person can file a Public Interest Litigation case (PIL) on
behalf of a group of persons, whose rights are affected. It is not necessary, that person filing a case
should have a direct interest in the Litigation14. For example: A person in Bangalore can file a Public
Interest Litigation for malnutrition deaths in Orissa. Any person can file a PIL on behalf of a group of
persons to compel municipal authorities to perform public duty. Any person can file a PIL in the
Supreme Court for taking action against a cracker factory that is employing child labour However, it will
depend on the facts and circumstances of each case, whether such a litigation should be allowed or not.
However, the strict rule of `locus standi’ applicable to the private litigation has been relaxed by the
Supreme Court.

(B) AGAINST WHOM: A Public Interest Litigation can be filed only against a State Government,
Central Government, Municipal Authorities, and not any private party. However a “Private

13
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-2241-comparative-analysis-of-citizens-suit-with-public-interest-
litigation.html
14
S .Shanthakumar, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AN INTRODUCTION, pp. 122, 123, Chennai: Surya Publication

-4-
party” can be included in the Public Interest Litigation as a “Respondent”, after making the
concerned State authority a party. For example, in the case of a private factory in Delhi, causing
pollution, then people living in its vicinity or any other person can file a PIL against the
Government of India, the State Pollution Board and also against the private factory. However, a
PIL cannot be filed against the private party alone; the concerned State Government and State
authority has to be made a party.

(C) WHEN PIL CAN BE FILED: A PIL can be filed when the following conditions are fulfilled:

 There must be a PUBLIC WRONG and PUBLIC INJURY caused by the wrongful act or
omission of the state or public authority.
 For the enforcement of the basic human rights of the weaker sections of the community
who are exploited, ignorant and whose fundamental and constitutional rights have been
infringed.
 It must not be frivolous litigation by persons having vested interests.

ROLE OF PIL IN ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

The role of the PIL in developing an environmental jurisprudence in India has been phenomenal.
Many leading decisions in the realm of environmental protection have been made by the Indian
judiciary through the suits brought by environmentalist in the form of PIL.

One among such names is that of MC Mehta who has been a tireless campaigner in this area and
his petitions have resulted in orders placing strict liability for the leak of Oleum gas from a
factory in New Delhi15, directions to check pollution in and around the Ganges river16, the
relocation of hazardous industries from the municipal limits of Delhi17, directions to state
agencies to check pollution in the vicinity of the TajMahal18 and several a forestation measures.
Also in the area of water pollution PIL has played an important role in future prevention of water
contamination through the principle of polluters' pay and precautionary principle.19
The environmental degradation has in the present time caught the attention of all the nations
across the globe. Massive efforts both at the national and international level were, and are being,
made to ward off the danger that looms large.

While at the international level scores of conventions and documents were made part of an
international effort to deal with this man-made menace, endeavors at the national level were

15
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1987) 1 SCC 395
16
M.C Mehta v. Union of India (1988) 1 SCC 471
17
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1996) 4 SCC 750
18
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1996) 4 SCC 351; Also see Emily R. Atwood, ‘Preserving the Taj Mahal: India's
struggle to salvage cultural icons in the wake of industrialisation', 11 Penn State Environmental Law Review 101
(Winter 2002)
19
Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India; 28/08/1996

-5-
initiated with all earnest to create a framework to see that we can ensure a conducive and viable
environment for a better and safe future. A crucial aspect of the entire outburst of environmental
protection has been the contribution made by judiciary in India. It has been an embankment
against any assault that threatens to tinker with environmental faithfulness and tends to impure
same. It has been doing so for some time through its decisions resulting in a labyrinth of
doctrinal enunciations that have to a large extent served the cause of environmental protection. In
the realm of environmental protection to the citizens the Indian judiciary played a commendable
role in balancing the twin goals of environmental protection and economic growth of the nation.
A reason the Supreme Court has adopted this activist stance is based on its perception of the lack
of remedies available in current legislation.

While this activist approach may be necessary to pursue an aggressive environmental protection
policy, the result of this judicial activism may be more harmful then helpful, especially in cases
where the judiciary oversteps its authority. This has been a constant fear associated with
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in entertaining PIL in environmental and other matters where
citizens' rights are concerned.

EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IN INDIA

Social change is the necessity of any society. In India it is done through Public Interest
Litigation. In this article, the researcher makes an attempt to examine the impact of PIL over the
citizens of India and in order to do this it is essential to understand the jurisprudence of PIL in
India. PIL as it is seen today has made a significant departure from the traditional judicial system
in India, which is not a drastic phenomenon. It was an idea that was in the making for some time
before its vigorous growth in the early eighties. But in recent time it has dominated the public
perception of the Supreme Court in India. The Court is now seen not only as providing remedy to
citizens through its writ jurisdiction but also formulating policies which makes it mandatory for
the states to follow.

Our judicial system is a very visible part of the inheritance from the British Raj. We continue to
rely on a sizeable body of statutory law and precedents from the colonial period, with the
exception of what is repugnant to our constitutional provisions. However, the framers of our
Constitution incorporated influences from several countries and adopted the idea of ‘judicial
review' as opposed to the British formulated ‘Parliamentary' form of government.20

20
There is an express provision for ‘judicial review' in Article 13 of the Constitution of India. Article 13(1) says
that all laws that were in force in the territory of India immediately before the adoption of the Constitution, in so
far as they are inconsistent with the provisions containing the fundamental rights, shall, to the extent of such
inconsistency, be void. Article 13(2) further says that the states shall not make any law that takes away or abridges
any of the fundamental rights, and any law made in contravention of the aforementioned mandate shall, to the
extent of the contravention, be void.

-6-
This very principle has levelled up the power of the courts to interfere in the policy formulation
of the other wings of the government and PIL is the result of such interference. Nevertheless,
through the conceptual practice of PIL, the judiciary has expanded the ambit of fundamental
right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India to include a list of innumerable rights
which came to be protected by the courts of law.

CITIZEN SUIT

A citizen suit is a lawsuit by a private citizen to enforce a statute. Citizen suits are particularly
common in the field of environmental law. Citizen suits come in three forms. First, a private
citizen can bring a lawsuit against a citizen, corporation, or government body for engaging in
conduct prohibited by the statute. Second, a private citizen can bring a lawsuit against a
government body for failing to perform a non-discretionary duty. “This third type of citizen suit
is analogous to the common law tort of public nuisance”21

Citizen Suit Provision In India

The legal remedies available to the citizens with regards to Water pollution in India are limited
as compared to countries like US, UK, Canada and Australia and are still in a developing phase.
It was in the year 1986 after the coming of Environmental protection act that a citizen got the
right to file a complaint under section 19 of the EPA and prosecute the polluter. In India,
therefore you have to first complain to the PCBs (pollution control board) and cannot directly
approach the court. Moreover a 6-month prior notice has to be given before filing the suit which
gives ample time to the polluter to get way with the crime. By amendments later in the water act
1974 it has been made mandatory for the PCBs to disclose all relevant information which is
needed by person filing suit against any pollutant22.

The Environment Protection Act, 1986-Though there is a host of legislation in India aimed at
protecting the environment from pollution and maintaining the ecological balance, the
environment has not so far been considered in its totality. The Environment 106 (Protection) Act,
1986, enacted under Art. 253 of the Constitution of India to implement the decisions made at the
United Nations Conference on Human Environment held at Stockholm, 1972 was expected to fill
the lacuna and provide a blue print for a progressive policy for protecting the ecosystem. The Act
seeks to supplement the existing laws on control of pollution by enacting a general legislation for
environmental protection and to fill the gaps in regulations of major environmental hazards23.

21
Citizen Suits: The Teeth in Public Participation, 25 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 10141 (Mar. 1995),
http://www.tulane.edu/~telc/assets/articles/Citz%20Suits%20Teeth-ELR_95.pdf ; Jeffrey G. Miller &
Environmental Law Inst., Citizen Suits: Private Enforcement of Federal Pollution Control Laws (1987).
22
Citizen Suits http://blog.sprlaw.com/category/citizen-suits
23
Middlesex City Board of Chosen Freeholders v. New Jersey, 645 F. Supp. 715, 721-22(D.N.J. 1986); see also RCRA
Imminent Hazard Authority: A Powerful Tool for Businesses, Governments, and Citizen Enforcers, 24 Envtl. L. Rep.
(Envtl. L. Inst.) 10122 (March 1994), http://www.tulane.edu/~telc/assets/articles/RCRA%20Haz%20ELR_94.pdf

-7-
Citizen suit provision under the Environment Protection Act, 1986 – Until the enactment of the
Environment Act, the power to prosecute under Indian environmental laws belonged exclusively
to the government. The citizens‟ suit provision in the Environment Act expands the concept of
locus standi in environmental prosecutions.24

Similar provisions allowing citizens participation in the enforcement of pollution laws are now
found in Sec.43 of the Air Act(as amended in 1987) and Sec.49 of the Water Act(as amended in
1988). Sec. 19 of the Environment Act provides that any person, in addition to authorized
government officials, may file a complaint with a court alleging an offence under the Act.
However, the person must have given notice of not less than 60 days of the alleged offence and
the intent to file a complaint with the government official authorized to make such complaints.
The citizens‟ suit provision appears to give the public significant powers to enforce the
Environment Act. However, some critics are of the view that during the 60 days’ notice period
required for the government to decide whether to proceed against the alleged violation, the
offending industry has time to clean up traces of the offence and prepare itself for the collection
of samples. Further, the government may file a complaint but does not pursue prosecution
diligently. There are no rules which require the publishing of information by polluters.

Citizen Suit (Procedure)25

A. Who can file and against whom
According to Section 7604 of the Clean Water Act, citizen suits come in three forms:
 First, a private citizen can bring a lawsuit against a citizen, corporation,
or government body for engaging in conduct prohibited by the statute. For example, a
citizen can sue a corporation under the Clean Water Act (CWA) for
illegally polluting a waterway.
 Second, a private citizen can bring a lawsuit against a government body for failing to
perform a non-discretionary duty. For example, a private citizen could sue
the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to promulgate regulations that the
CWA required it to promulgate.
 In a third, less common form, citizens may sue for an injunction to abate a potential
imminent and substantial endangerment involving generation, disposal or handling of
waste, regardless of whether or not the defendant’s conduct violates a statutory
prohibition. This third type of citizen suit is analogous to the common
law tort of public nuisance.
 In general, the law entitles plaintiffs who bring successful citizen suits to recover
reasonable attorney fees and other litigation costs.

B. When can be filed

24
Ratlam Municipal Council v. Vardhichand AIR 1980 SC 1622
25
https://legaljugaad.wordpress.com/2017/06/13/citizen-suit-provision-under-various-environmental-
legislations/#_ftn1

-8-
 Citizens may only bring citizen suits in federal court if they have “standing to sue.” To establish
standing, the courts have required proof of three elements.
 First, the plaintiff must have suffered an “injury in fact”-an invasion of a legally
protected interest which is
(a) Concrete and particular and
(b) Actual or imminent and not
(c) Conjectural or hypothetical
 Second, there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct
complained of. The injury has to be fairly traceable to the challenged action of the
defendant and not the result of an independent action of some third party not before
the court.
 Third, it must be “likely” as opposed to merely “speculative” that the injury will be
redressed by a favorable decision.

SITUATION BEFORE THE INTRODUCTION OF CITIZEN SUIT

PROVISION IN ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATIONS

The concept of citizen suit provision as stated earlier was not a part of the original Act which
was passed by the parliament. Although it was felt that the board had been given way too much
power by the legislature and people who are ultimately affected must have a locus standi in such
cases.

Before the legislature passed the amendment including the provision of citizen suit provision
various there alternatives were available to the public to raise an action in case of environment
pollution.

 The remedies available in India for environmental protection comprise of tortuous as well
as statutory law remedies. The tortuous remedies available are trespass(It connotes failure
to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like
circumstances), nuisance, strict liability (The rule enunciated in Rylands v. Fletcher by
Blackburn J. is that the person who for his own purpose brings on his land and collects
and keeps there anything likely to be a mischief, if it escapes, must keep it as its peril,
and if he does not do so is prima facie even though, he will be answerable for all the
damage which is the natural consequence of its escape. The doctrine of strict liability has
considerable utility in environmental pollution cases especially cases dealing with the
harm caused by the leakage of hazardous substances) and negligence.

The judgment of the Supreme Court in instant case is a land mark in the history of judicial
activism in upholding the social justice component of the rule of law by fixing liability on
statutory authorities to discharge their legal obligation to the people in abating public nuisance
and making the environmental pollution free even if there is a budgetary constraints., J. Krishna

-9-
Iyer observed that,” social justice is due to and therefore the people must be able to trigger off
the jurisdiction vested for their benefit to any public functioning.” Thus he recognized PIL as a
Constitutional obligation of the courts.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) AND

CITIZEN SUIT PROVISION

The basic difference between PIL and the citizen suit provision is that a PIL is a much broader
concept that the citizen suit provision also citizen suit provision is governed by the respective
acts and is not a matter of right while moving to the High Court or the Supreme Court cannot be
barred.26
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) or Social Action Litigation (SAL) is permitted by the Supreme
Court and High Courts under writ jurisdiction at the instance of public spirited citizens for the
enforcement of constitutional and other legal rights of any person or groups of persons who
because of their disadvantageous position are unable to approach the court for relief. The
Supreme Court under Article 32 and the High Courts under Article 226 can be moved by any
public spirited citizen or by NGOs for the prevention of environmental pollution.
The Environment (Protection) Act, provided for the first time in 1986, citizen suit provisions in
the lower courts. Under Section 19 of the Act, a citizen may prosecute a polluter by filing a
complaint to a Judicial Magistrate Court. It can be done after giving 60 days’ notice to the State
Pollution Control Board of his or her intention to the file a case. Hitherto, only the government
could file a case. Later, similar provisions have been provided under Section 43 of the Air Act,
1981 and Section 49 of the Water Act, 1974, by way of amendments. All these provisions make
it mandatory for the pollution control boards to disclose all relevant internal reports to a person
who intends to prosecute the polluter27.

26
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/peiln.htm
27
https://legaljugaad.wordpress.com/2017/06/13/citizen-suit-provision-under-various-environmental-legislations/
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/role-indian-judiciary-protection-environment-india/

- 10 -
IMPORTANT LANDMARK JUDGMENTS BY JUDICIARY
 Sanitation in Ratlam28: In a landmark judgment in 1980, the Supreme Court explicitly
recognized the impact of a deteriorating urban environment on the poor. It linked basic
public health facilities to human rights and compelled the municipality to provide proper
sanitation and drainage

 Doon Valley Quarrying29: In 1987, the Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, on the
behalf of residents of the Doon valley, filed a case in the Supreme Court against
limestone quarrying. This case was the first requiring the Supreme Court to balance
environmental and ecological integrity against industrial demands on forest resources.
The courts directed the authorities to stop quarrying in the Mussoorie hills
 Gas leak in Shriram Factory30: In the historic case of the oleum gas leak from the
Shriram Food and Fertilizer factory in Delhi, in 1986, the Supreme Court ordered the
management to pay compensation to the victims of the gas leak. The “absolute liability”
of a hazardous chemical manufacturer to give compensation to all those affected by an
accident was introduced in this case and it was the first time compensation was paid to
victims.
 Construction in Silent Valley: In 1980, the Kerala High Court threw out a writ filed by
the Society for the Protection of the Silent Valley seeking a ban on construction of a
hydro-electric project in the valley. However, despite an unfavorable judgment, active
lobbying and grassroots action by environmentalists stopped the project.
 In 1985, Activist-Advocate M C Mehta filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court to
highlight the pollution of the Ganga by industries and municipalities located on its banks.
In a historic judgment in 198731, the court ordered the closure of a number of polluting
tanneries near Kanpur. Justice E S Venkataramiah, in his judgment, observed: “Just like
an industry which cannot pay minimum wages to its workers cannot be allowed to exist, a
tannery which cannot set up a primary treatment plant cannot be permitted to continue to
be in existence.”
 Mining in Sariska32: A writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court in 1991 by the
Tarun Bharat Sangh to stop mining in the Sariska wildlife sanctuary. The court banned
mining in the sanctuary
 Against vehicular pollution in India the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in
1992. A retired Judge of the Supreme Court was appointed along with three members to
recommend measures for the nationwide control of vehicular pollution. Orders for
providing Lead free petrol in the country and for the use of natural gas and other mode of

28
Municipal Council, Ratlam vs Vardhichand And Ors 1980 AIR 1622, 1981 SCR (1) 97
29
Rural Litigation & Entitlement Kendra vs State of U.P. 1989 AIR 594, 1989 SCC Supl. (1) 537
30
M.C. Mehta & ANR. ETC. vs Union of India & Ors. ETC 1987 AIR 965, 1986 SCR (1) 312
31
M.C. Mehta vs Union of India & Ors 1991 SCC (2) 353
32
M.C. Mehta vs Union of India & Ors 1988 AIR 1115

- 11 -
 fuels for use in the vehicles in India have been passed and carried out. Lead-free petrol
had been introduced in the four metropolitan cities from April 1995; all new cars
registered from April 1995 onwards have been fitted with catalytic convertors; COG
outlets have been set up to provide CNG as a clean fuel in Delhi and other cities in India
apart from Euro 2 norms. As a result of this case, Delhi has become the first city in the
world to have complete public transportation running on CNG.
33
 In the State of Himachal Pradesh, Span motel , owned by the family members of Shri
Kamal Nath, Minister for Environment and Forests, Govt. of India diverted the Course of
river Beas to beautify the motel and also encroached upon some forest land. The apex
court ordered the management of the Span motel to hand over forest land to the Govt. of
Himachal Pradesh and remove all sorts of encroachments.
The Court delivered a land mark judgment and established principle of exemplary
damages for the first time in India. The Court said that polluter must pay to reverse the
damage caused by his act and imposed a fine of Rs Ten Lakhs (Rs 10,00,000) on the
Span motel as exemplary damages. The Supreme Court of India recognized Polluter Pays
Principle and Public Trust Doctrine.
Many more such cases could be added from the history of Indian Judiciary which are more vocal
in support of Environment and healthy life than other pillars of Indian Democracy. They have
capitalized the provisions mentioned in the constitution itself while taking advantage of cardinal
principles of International treaties and conventions.

SOME REMARKABLE PRINCIPLES AND DOCTRINES PROPOUNDED

BY THE INDIAN JUDICIARY:-

1. Doctrine of Absolute Liability: The Bhopal Case: Union Carbide Corporation v. Union Of
India34: In this case, the court held that, where an enterprise is occupied with an inherently
dangerous or a hazardous activity and harm results to anybody by virtue of a mishap in the
operation of such dangerous or naturally unsafe movement coming about, for instance, in
getaway of poisonous gas, the enterprise is strictly and completely obligated to repay every one
of the individuals who are influenced by the accident and such risk is not subject to any
exemptions. Accordingly, Supreme Court created another trend of Absolute Liability without
any exemption.

2. Polluter Pays Principles: “If anyone intentionally spoils the water of another … let him not
only pay damages, but purify the stream or cistern which contains the water…” – Plato

Polluter Pays Principle has become a very popular concept lately. ‘If you make a mess, it’s your
duty to clean it up ‘- this is the fundamental basis of this slogan. It should be mentioned that in

33
M.C. Mehta vs Kamal Nath & Ors (1997) 1 SCC 388
34
AIR 1990 SC 273

- 12 -
environment law, the ‘polluter pays principle’ does not allude to “fault.” Instead, it supports a
remedial methodology which is concerned with repairing natural harm. It’s a rule in international
environmental law where the polluting party pays for the harm or damage done to the natural
environment.

Vellore Citizen’s Welfare Forum v. Union of India35: The Supreme Court has declared that the
polluter pays principle is an essential feature of the sustainable development.

3. Precautionary Principle: The Supreme Court of India, in Vellore Citizens Forum Case,
developed the following three concepts for the precautionary principle: Environmental measures
must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation, Lack of scientific
certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures, Onus of proof is on the actor to
show that his action is benign.

4. Public Trust Doctrine: The Public Trust Doctrine primarily rests on the principle that
certain resources like air, water, sea and the forests have such a great importance to people as a
whole that it would be wholly unjustified to make them a subject of private ownership.

M.C.Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others36: The public trust doctrine, as discussed by court in this
judgment is a part of the law of the land.

5. Doctrine of Sustainable Development: The World commission on Environment and

Development (WCED) in its report prominently known as the ‘Brundtland Report’ named after
the Chairman of the Commission Ms. GH Brundtland highlights the concept of sustainable
development. As per Brundtland Report, Sustainable development signifies” development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet
their own needs”37. There is a need for the courts to strike a balance between development and
environment.

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of UP38: The court for the first time dealt with
the issue relating to the environment and development; and held that, it is always to be
remembered that these are the permanent assets of mankind and or not intended to be exhausted
in one generation.

Vellore Citizen’s Welfare Forum39 : In this case, the Supreme Court observed that sustainable
development has come to be accepted as a viable concept to eradicate poverty and improve the
quality of human life while living within the carrying capacity of the supporting eco- system.

35
AIR 1996 SCC 212
36
(1997)1 SCC 388
37
S .Shanthakumar, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AN INTRODUCTION, pp. 122, 123, Chennai: Surya Publication
38
AIR 1987 SC 1037
39
AIR 1996 5 SCC 647

- 13 -
CONCLUSION

The public interest litigation is the product of realization of the constitutional obligation of the
courts. This led to the evolution of environmental jurisprudence in India through the
instrumentality of the courts and the courts in India especially the higher judiciary has
spearheaded the development of PIL in order to promote and vindicate public interest which
demands that violations of constitutional or legal rights of large numbers of people who are poor,
ignorant or in a socially or economically disadvantaged position should not go unnoticed and
unaddressed. Through various decisions (few mentioned above) the courts have proved in reality
its efficiency in this field. Even in case of citizens' suits this protection is guaranteed through the
statutory provisions of USA which gives certain latitude to the citizens to remedy the inactions
of the government. However, they are not allowed to file suits in cases where there is no
violation of environmental standards. The United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit has
affirmed that private citizens have no right to sue under the Clean Water Act for matters that are
not related to violations of effluent standards. This reduces the scope of citizens' suits in
comparison to PIL; nevertheless, it has its advantages of its own taking into consideration the
prevailing situations in the country. Based on the national fabric of both countries the public
interest suits are devised in order to protect and promote human rights at an optimal level.

SUGGESTION & RECOMMENDATION

Thus, after the analysis of above cases, we find that, the Supreme Court is, at the present time,
stretching the different legal provisions for environmental protection. These new innovations and
developments in India by the judicial activism open the numerous approaches to help the
country. In India, the courts are extremely cognizant and cautious about the special nature of
environmental rights, considering that the loss of natural resources can’t be renewed. There are
some recommendations which need to be considered:

 Public Awareness: In India, media is the fourth pillar of the popular government. It plays an
exceptionally essential and compelling part in the general improvement of the country. The
effect of media can be seen in the different trials directed by it just by publishing them in
their media. Accordingly, the issue of environmental pollution can be checked by making
mindfulness in the general population, in which media’s part is extremely critical. The
compelling agency of correspondence not just influences the mind of the individuals but is
also capable of developing thoughts and desirable attitudes of the people for protecting
environment.
 Regular Inspection: There is a requirement for a standard review apparatus, which can
inspect and examine periodically every one of those exercises which are threatening the
environment. This would be a successful step towards environment protection, since
prevention is better than cure.

- 14 -
 Environmental Education: There is no means for any law, unless it’s an effective and
successful implementation, and for effective implementation, public awareness is a crucial
condition. Therefore, it is essential that there ought to be proper awareness. This contention
is additionally maintained by the Apex Court in the instance of M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India40. In this case, Court directed the Union Government was obliged to issue directions to
all the State governments and the union territories to enforce through authorities as a
condition for license on all cinema halls, to obligatory display free of expense no less than
two slides/messages on environment amid each show. Moreover, Law Commission of India
in its 186th report made a proposal for the constitution of the environment court. Hence,
there is an urgent need to strengthen the hands of judiciary by making separate environmental
courts, with a professional judge to manage the environment cases/criminal acts, so that the
judiciary can perform its part more viably.

40
1987 SCR (1) 819

- 15 -
REFERENCES
 http://blog.ipleaders.in/how-and-where-a-common-citizen-can-file-a-
complaint-against-water-pollution-in-india/

 http://www.environmentallawsofindia.com/public.html

 http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/6565/9/09_chapter%204.p
df

 http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/role-indian-judiciary-protection-
environment-india/#_edn7

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

 Environmental Law in India by Prof. P.Leelakrishnan

 Water (Prevention and control of pollution) Act of 1974

 The Air (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1981

 https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=water%20act

 https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/role-indian-judiciary-protection-
environment-india/
 https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/role-of-pil-in-environment-protection-
in-india-by-pinky-dass/
 https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/role-of-pil-in-environment-protection-
in-india-by-pinky-dass/#_ftn1

- 16 -