ENVIRONMENTAL JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIA: ROLE OF M.C. MEHTA

admin | June 15, 2020 | Environmental Laws | No Comments

THIS ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN BY AGAM BANSAL, A STUDENT OF RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW PATIALA, PUNJAB

INTRODUCTION

Through the advent of industrialisation, development has come at a rapid pace in the modern world. At what cost though? Our environment has had to face majority of the negative effects that this development has brought with itself.

Hence, there arises the need for environment laws in a country like India, which has constantly been embarking on this development journey. In a country which comprises of 135 crore people, preservation of the floral and faunal species is one of the last things in a person’s mind. As more and more industrial houses are set up, the rapid cutting down of forests has also increased.

A pioneer of environmental jurisprudence in India is Mahesh Chandra Mehta. A public interest attorney, he has won various landmark judgements and cases in the apex court of India since 1984, almost single-handedly. He was one of the first persons to observe that the white marble of the Taj Mahal has turned yellow and knew that this was a result of the harmful pollutants being released by the industrial units nearby. Not only that, he was also one of the first to realise that the holy river Ganges, was being polluted day in and day out due to the industrial effluents being released in the river by the industries near its basin.[1]

Mehta received the Goldman Environmental Prize in 1996 for his continued and prolonged efforts to fight against pollution-causing industrial units. More than that, he is also a Ramon Magsaysay Award recipient for Asia. He received this award for public service in 1997. He received the Padma Shri from the Government of India as recently as 2016.

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION LAWS AND PROVISIONS IN INDIA

2.1 Environment Protection Act, 1986

The Environment Protection Act, 1986 was passed as an expression of environmental equality in the wake of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment which took place in 1972 at Stockholm. It came into being under Article 253 of the Constitution of India.

“253. Legislation for giving effect to international agreements.— Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention with any other country or countries or any decision made at any international conference, association or other body.”[2]

The primary purpose of this act was to commence the enactment of laws relating to general environment protection. These laws could be applied in regions suffering from severe environmental hazards. Also, it was aimed at achieving sustainable development as it forms part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It gave the authority and the power to the Government to lay down necessary procedures and safeguards in order to handle any particular substance which might be harmful to the environment.[3]

Emphasis must also be laid in this regard to the case of Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India.[4] The Supreme Court of India, in this case, laid down the Precautionary Principle and the Polluter Pays Principle, and directed the authorities to implement the same.

2.2 National Green Tribunal Act, 2010

The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 was enacted as a result of a rise in cases related to environmental degradation. There was a mounting burden on the Supreme Court to adhere to environment related matters. Speedy disposal of these cases was not being made possible. Hence, in order to ease the burden on the apex court of the country and to achieve effective and speedy disposal of cases, the parliament decided to enact the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The aim of this Act was to establish a National Green Tribunal which would ease the backlog of cases with the Supreme Court and help in effective disposal of environment related issues. Moreover, it would help in preserving the nature, its flora and fauna, and help the individual to realise his basic right to a free, healthy and safe environment.

In A. P. Pollution Control Board v. M. V. Nayudu,[5] the Supreme Court in its judgement held that environmental courts must be established for the fast adjudication of the cases relating to the environmental law.

Another purpose behind enacting this Act was to conform to the Directive Principles of State Policy given under Article 47 and Article 48 of the Constitution of India. These principles, although unenforceable, hold utmost importance and the court has had to depend on these principles and conform to them over the years.[6]

Some other enactments related to environment protection in India are as follows:-

Indian Forest Act, 1927
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960

Wild Life Protection Act, 1972

The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

Ganga Action Plan, 1986
National Forest Policy, 1988

Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001
Biological Diversity Act, 2002

Also, protection and preservation of the environment has been regarded as a directive principle of state policy and a fundamental duty by the Indian Constitution.

“48A. Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life.—- The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.”[7]

“51A. Fundamental duties.—- It shall be the duty of every citizen of India—-

(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures.”[8]

M.C. MEHTA AND HIS CONTRIBUTIONS

3.1 Public Trust Doctrine

The Supreme Court laid out this principle in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath.[9] The court observed that the public trust doctrine basically means that all the natural resources like air, water, sea and forests are much more significant when enjoyed by the public as a whole and hence, it is unjustifiable to consider them as a subject of private ownership.

3.2 Shriram Factory Gas Leak

In the landmark case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India,[10] an oleum gas leak occurred at the Shriram Food and Fertilizer factory in Delhi. This case pertains to the year 1986. In this case, the apex court applied the doctrine of Absolute Liability and held the manufacturer of the hazardous chemical as absolutely liable to the victims of this gas leak. The court ordered the manufacturer to compensate all those who were affected by this accident. This was actually the first incident in which compensation was paid to the victims.

3.3 Pollution of the Ganges

A writ petition was filed by Mehta in 1985 in the apex Court in order to showcase how various industries, factories and municipalities located on the banks of the Ganga were polluting the holy river by releasing harmful effluents in it. In yet another landmark judgement on environment protection, the Court ordered the closure of a number of tanneries located near Kanpur which were responsible for polluting the sacred river. The Court ordered the industries to install a sewage treatment plant and those who fail to comply shall cease to exist.[11]

CONCLUSION

Environmental jurisprudence in India has undergone a whirlwind change over the past 35 years with the introduction of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the establishment of the National Green Tribunal. People like M.C. Mehta have been largely responsible for this positive change. Such people realise that as important as it is to fight for one’s fundamental rights, it is equally important to perform the fundamental duties one owes to the State. One such duty is to protect and preserve the environment i.e. the flora and fauna around us. Our nation is headed towards industrialisation and preservation of the environment might suffer in this process. Our nation needs more activists and attorneys like Mahesh Chandra Mehta who realise the importance of preserving the ecosystem.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

P. JAIN, INDIAN CONSTITUITIONAL LAW (LexisNexis, 8^th ed. 2019).

Journal Article

M. Jariwala, Direction of Environmental Justice in India: Critical Appraisal of 1987 Case Law, 35 JOURNAL OF THE INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE 92, (1993).

[1] THE GOLDMAN ENVIRONMENTAL PRIZE, https://www.goldmanprize.org/recipient/mc-mehta/.

[2] INDIA CONST. art. 253.

[3] Subodh Asthana, Overview of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, IPLEADERS (Jun. 21, 2019), https://blog.ipleaders.in/environment-protection-act-1986/.

[4] Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India & Ors., (1996) 5 S.C.C. 647.

[5] A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu (Retd.) & Ors., (1999) 2 S.C.C. 718.

[6] Sylvine, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 – Aims and Objectives, IPLEADERS (Jul. 14, 2016), https://blog.ipleaders.in/national-green-tribunal-act-2010-aims-objectives/.

[7] INDIA CONST. art. 48A.

[8] INDIA CONST. art. 51A, cl. g.

[9] M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath & Ors., (1997) 1 S.C.C. 388.

[10] M.C. Mehta & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (1986) 2 S.C.C. 176.

[11] M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors., (1988) 1 S.C.C. 471.