Environmental Law

UNIT I
1.1 Introduction: The concept of Environment, the basic concepts of ecology and ecosystem;
The ‘Environment’ is very important for us to understand because it constitutes our
surroundings and affects our ability to live on the earth. It comprises of the air we breathe, the water
that covers most of the earth’s surface, the plants and animals around us, and much more. It is
therefore, very important to understand and appreciate the importance of ‘environment’ in our daily
life. In recent years, scientists have been carefully examining the various ways by which people affect
the ‘Environment’. They have found that we are causing air pollution, deforestation, acid rain, and other
problems that are dangerous both to the earth and to ourselves. The Government in the last few
decades has shown keen interest in protecting and promoting the environment and consequently
enacted various Environmental Laws.

MEANING OF ENVIRONMENT
The word ‘environment’ is derived from the French word ‘environner’, which means ‘to encircle’
or to surround.
The most suitable definition of environment is as follows: It is the sum total of water, air and
land and the interrelationships that exist among them with human beings, other living organisms and
materials.
The geographical meaning of environment is as follows: It is a combination of living and non-
living things and their mutual interaction with each other which leads to an ecosystem. The
environment encompasses all living and non-living things occurring naturally on earth.
The Honourable Supreme Court has the following definition of ‘environment’: “Environment” is a
difficult word to define. Its normal meaning relates to the surroundings, but obviously, that is a concept
which is relatable to whatever object it is, which is surrounded. Environment is a polycentric and
multifaceted problem affecting the human existence. Today protection of ‘environment’ is a global issue
as it concerns all countries irrespective of their size, stage or development or ideology. Today, the
interaction between society and nature is so extensive that the question of environment has assumed
large proportions, affecting humanity at large.

Every society in the world is committed to improving the understanding, protection, and enhancement
of ecological systems and human communities through better design, planning, management, and policy
making. The study ofthe environment is a field that has crossed the boundaries of traditional disciplines
and has challenged Governments, NGOs and individuals to look at the relationship between humans and
their environment from a variety of perspectives.

Meaning-
The term environment comes from tlie French word "environmer" which means 'surroundings'.
Everything, which surrounds us whether, living or a non-living is a component of our environment. It
includes the air we breathe, the water we use for our needs, the soil we cultivate, the flora and the fauna
we enjoy. Broadly, it is defined as "the sum of all external conditions affecting the life, developments
and survival of an organism". The external conditions include both physical and biological. By physical
conditions (also called physical environment) we mean nonliving attributes like air, water, soil, climate,
heat, light, noise, housing, radiations, and debris, whereas the biological factors (also called biological
environment) include all types of flora, fauna and the micro-organisms. The physical and the biological
environments are interdependent. For example, deforestation leads to decline in wildlife population
(biological environment) as well as increase in atmospheric temperature (physical environment). In the
human environment social conditions like customs, religion, habit, and occupation are also included
since they affect tie living conditions.

Classification of Environment
Broadly speaking environment is of two types:
 a) Physical or natural environment; and
b) Cultural or social environment

Physical environment is the product of nature where there is no direct or indirect effect of
human activity. Rocks, minerals, temperature, humidity, wind, rain, and other related non-living
elements are example of physical environment.
Cultural environment is man-made like railways, population density, cultural background of the
people, the level of technological development and factors like personal, domestic, religious,
educational, means of transport, market facilities, economic conditions, and policies of the government.

1.2 Ancient Indian approach to Environment, Traditional approach;

1.3 Recent issues relating to environment, National and International Perspectives, Population
and Developmental impact on environment.
Environmental Problems
Our environment is constantly changing. There is no denying that. However, as our environment
changes, so does the need to become increasingly aware of the problems that surround it. With a
massive influx of natural disasters, warming and cooling periods, different types of weather patterns
and much more, people need to be aware of what types of environmental problems our planet is facing.
Global warming has become an undisputed fact about our current livelihoods; our planet is
warming up and we are definitely part of the problem. However, this isn’t the only environmental
problem that we should be concerned about. All across the world, people are facing a wealth of new and
challenging environmental problems every day. Some of them are small and only affect a few
ecosystems, but others are drastically changing the landscape of what we already know.
Our planet is poised at the brink of a severe environmental crisis. Current environmental
problems make us vulnerable to disasters and tragedies, now and in the future. We are in a state of
planetary emergency, with environmental problems piling up high around us. Unless we address the
various issues prudently and seriously we are surely doomed for disaster. Current environmental
problems require urgent attention.

15 Major Current Environmental Problems

1. Pollution: Pollution of air, water and soil require millions of years to recoup. Industry and
motor vehicle exhaust are the number one pollutants. Heavy metals, nitrates and plastic are toxins
responsible for pollution. While water pollution is caused by oil spill, acid rain, urban runoff; air
pollution is caused by various gases and toxins released by industries and factories and combustion of
fossil fuels; soil pollution is majorly caused by industrial waste that deprives soil from essential
nutrients.
2. Global Warming: Climate changes like global warming is the result of human practices like
emission of Greenhouse gases. Global warming leads to rising temperatures of the oceans and the earth’
surface causing melting of polar ice caps, rise in sea levels and also unnatural patterns of precipitation
such as flash floods, excessive snow or desertification.
3. Overpopulation: The population of the planet is reaching unsustainable levels as it faces
shortage of resources like water, fuel and food. Population explosion in less developed and developing
countries is straining the already scarce resources. Intensive agriculture practiced to produce food
damages the environment through use of chemical fertilizer, pesticides and insecticides.
Overpopulation is one of the crucial current environmental problem.
 4. Natural Resource Depletion: Natural resource depletion is another crucial current
environmental problems. Fossil fuel consumption results in emission of Greenhouse gases, which is
responsible for global warming and climate change. Globally, people are taking efforts to shift to
renewable sources of energy like solar, wind, biogas and geothermal energy. The cost of installing the
infrastructure and maintaining these sources has plummeted in the recent years.
5. Waste Disposal: The over consumption of resources and creation of plastics are creating a
global crisis of waste disposal. Developed countries are notorious for producing an excessive amount of
waste or garbage and dumping their waste in the oceans and, less developed countries. Nuclear waste
disposal has tremendous health hazards associated with it. Plastic, fast food, packaging and cheap
electronic wastes threaten the well being of humans. Waste disposal is one of urgent current
environmental problem.
6. Climate Change: Climate change is yet another environmental problem that has surfaced in
last couple of decades. It occurs due to rise in global warming which occurs due to increase in
temperature of atmosphere by burning of fossil fuels and release of harmful gases by industries. Climate
change has various harmful effects but not limited to melting of polar ice, change in seasons, occurrence
of new diseases, frequent occurrence of floods and change in overall weather scenario.
7. Loss of Biodiversity: Human activity is leading to the extinction of species and habitats and
loss of bio-diversity. Eco systems, which took millions of years to perfect, are in danger when any
species population is decimating. Balance of natural processes like pollination is crucial to the survival
of the eco-system and human activity threatens the same. Another example is the destruction of coral
reefs in the various oceans, which support the rich marine life.
8. Deforestation: Our forests are natural sinks of carbon dioxide and produce fresh oxygen as
well as helps in regulating temperature and rainfall. At present forests cover 30% of the land but every
year tree cover is lost amounting to the country of Panama due to growing population demand for more
food, shelter and cloth. Deforestation simply means clearing of green cover and make that land available
for residential, industrial or commercial purpose.
9. Ocean Acidification: It is a direct impact of excessive production of CO2. 25% of CO2
produced by humans. The ocean acidity has increased by the last 250 years but by 2100, it may shoot
up by 150%. The main impact is on shellfish and plankton in the same way as human osteoporosis.
10. Ozone Layer Depletion: The ozone layer is an invisible layer of protection around the
planet that protects us from the sun’s harmful rays. Depletion of the crucial Ozone layer of the
atmosphere is attributed to pollution caused by Chlorine and Bromide found in Chloro-floro carbons
(CFC’s). Once these toxic gases reach the upper atmosphere, they cause a hole in the ozone layer, the
biggest of which is above the Antarctic. The CFC’s are banned in many industries and consumer
products. Ozone layer is valuable because it prevents harmful UV radiation from reaching the earth.
This is one of the most important current environmental problem.
11. Acid Rain: Acid rain occurs due to the presence of certain pollutants in the atmosphere. Acid
rain can be caused due to combustion of fossil fuels or erupting volcanoes or rotting vegetation which
release sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides into the atmosphere. Acid rain is a known environmental
problem that can have serious effect on human health, wildlife and aquatic species.
12. Water Pollution: Clean drinking water is becoming a rare commodity. Water is becoming an
economic and political issue as the human population fights for this resource. One of the options
suggested is using the process of desalinization. Industrial development is filling our rivers seas and
oceans with toxic pollutants which are a major threat to human health.
13. Urban Sprawl: Urban sprawl refers to migration of population from high density urban
areas to low density rural areas which results in spreading of city over more and more rural land. Urban
sprawl results in land degradation, increased traffic, environmental issues and health issues. The ever
growing demand of land displaces natural environment consisting of flora and fauna instead of being
replaced.
14: Public Health Issues: The current environmental problems pose a lot of risk to health of
humans, and animals. Dirty water is the biggest health risk of the world and poses threat to the quality
of life and public health. Run-off to rivers carries along toxins, chemicals and disease carrying
organisms. Pollutants cause respiratory disease like Asthma and cardiac-vascular problems. High
temperatures encourage the spread of infectious diseases like Dengue.
 15. Genetic Engineering: Genetic modification of food using biotechnology is called genetic
engineering. Genetic modification of food results in increased toxins and diseases as genes from an
allergic plant can transfer to target plant. Genetically modified crops can cause serious environmental
problems as an engineered gene may prove toxic to wildlife. Another drawback is that increased use of
toxins to make insect resistant plant can cause resultant organisms to become resistant to antibiotics.
The need for change in our daily lives and the movements of our government is growing. Because so
many different factors come into play; voting, governmental issues, the desire to stick to routine, many
people don’t consider that what they do will affect future generations. If humans continue moving
forward in such a harmful way towards the future, then there will be no future to consider. Although it’s
true that we cannot physically stop our ozone layer from thinning (and scientists are still having trouble
figuring out what is causing it exactly,) there are still so many things we can do to try and put a dent in
what we already know. By raising awareness in your local community and within your families about
these issues, you can help contribute to a more environmentally conscious and friendly place for you to
live.

UNIT 2: Law and Environmental Protection:

2.1 International: International conventions in the development of environmental laws and its
Policy-Form Stockholm to recent conventions – Multilateral environmental agreements –Common Law
aspects of Environmental Protection; U. N. Millennium Declaration.
 2.2 Indian: Constitution of India-Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles of State Policy,
Fundamental Duties; Relevant Provisions of I. P. C., Cr. P. C., C. P. C., for preventing pollution;
2.3 Environment Protection Act, 1986, ECO-Mark, Environment Impact Assessment,
Environmental Audit, Public Participation in Environmental decision making, Environment information,
public hearing

2.1 International: International conventions in the development of environmental laws and its
Policy-Form Stockholm to recent conventions – Multilateral environmental agreements –
Common Law aspects of Environmental Protection; U. N. Millennium Declaration.

Introduction
Global growth of public concern for the natural environment has been one of the most important
developments in recent decades. Globalization has helped connect societies and their environmental
fates more closely than ever before. At the same time, environmental problems increasingly cross
national borders and giving serious impact to the health of the Earth. The development of more
effective environmental laws and legal systems throughout the world has thus become critical to
altering economic development and growth onto path of environmental sustainability. However, the
responses have been surprisingly progressive. Many countries are transplanting law and regulatory
policy innovations of other nations, even when they have very different legal and cultural traditions.
Many national regulatory initiatives also exhibit design and functional similarities that reveal a growing
convergence around a few principal approaches to environmental regulation.
Increased cooperation between governments, non-governmental organizations, multinational
corporations, and the growth of transnational environmental networks have also significantly
influenced the development of environmental law and regulation. As result, it has been emergence of
International environmental law, which is a field of ‘law’ that is international, national and
transnational in character at all once. International environmental law is the set of legal principles and
practices national, international, and transnational environmental regulatory systems to protect the
environment and manage natural resources. Therefore, as a body of law, International environmental
law is made up from different set of substantive principles and procedural methods that are specifically
important or unique to governance and institution that concern of the environment across the world.
It includes:
(1) Public international environmental law, which usually refer to the set of treaties and
customary international legal principles governing the relations between or among nations,
(2) National environmental law, which refer to the principles used by national
governments to regulate and manage the behaviour of private individuals, organization, and sub-
national government institutions within their borders,
(3) Transnational law, commonly refer to the set of legal principles used to regulate the
cross-border relationship between private individuals and organizations.

Background
As in other areas of law, religious or ethical beliefs may motivate individuals and governments
to put force on environmental protection. An additional basis for action at the international level is
desire to avoid interstate conflicts over depleted or scarce resources or consequent to incidents of
trans-boundaries pollution. From religious perspectives may motivate believers in favour of
environmental protection. In Judaism-Christian religious traditions, in theirs holy books, it is state that
the ‘dominion’ given humans over other living beings, not means to grant ownership over nature, but
rather to establish the right to beneficial use, as a guardian or a trust. A Moslem study also noted that in
relationship between Islam and environment, humans are seen as forming part of the universe, whose
elements are complementary to one another in integrated whole. Humankind has a special relationship
to other parts of nature, a stewardship of utilization and development. Many indigenous religions also
contain guides on respect all life and impose duties on individuals and the community to avoid waste or
harm the nature.
Environmental ethicists construct environmental protection around concepts of equity
and justice, as seen in three sets of relationships: among existing persons, between present and future
generations, and between humans and other species. Self-interest also provides a rationale for attention
to the environment. Humanity’s concern with long-term human survival also underlies many legal and
social norms and may be grounded in a genetic or biological imperative. Interesting survival of the
human species requires that ‘humanity’ be seen to include not only present but also future generations.
From these various origins, concern for the environment has emerged.

Stockholm Convention
i. Objectives and Overview of the Stockholm Convention
The Stockholm Convention is a global treaty focused on protecting human health and the
environment from persistent organic pollutants (POPs). POPs are chemicals that remain intact in the
environment for long periods, become widely distributed geographically, accumulate in the fatty tissue
of living organisms, and are toxic to humans and wildlife. With the evidence of long-range transport of
these chemicals to regions where they have never been used or produced and the consequent global
threats they pose to human health and the environment, States recognized the need for global actions to
reduce and eliminate releases of these chemicals.
The Stockholm Convention, which is the first global, legally binding agreement designed to
protect human health and the environment from the harmful impacts of POPs, came into force in May
2004. In order to achieve its objective, the Stockholm Convention seeks to eliminate or restrict the
production and use of intentionally produced POPs. It also seeks to continue minimizing and, where
feasible, ultimately eliminate releases of unintentionally produced POPs. In addition, the Stockholm
Convention requires Parties to develop strategies for identifying POPs stockpiles and wastes and to
ensure that they are managed or disposed of in an environmentally sound manner

ii. Trade-related and other Measures of the Stockholm Convention

In line with its objectives, the core measures of the Stockholm Convention are those that require
eliminating and restricting the production and use of listed chemicals. The Convention contains trade-
related measures to support these aims. For example, the Stockholm Convention requires Parties to
limit trade in POPs to those countries that comply with the Convention’s provisions, in order to ensure
that all POPs existing or produced within the Parties are used and disposed of subject to its restrictions.
Article 3, for instance, requires Parties to ban imports of listed chemicals, except if the import is from
another Party and is destined for environmentally sound disposal or the chemical is covered by a
specific exemption. Article 3 also requires all Parties to ban the export of listed chemicals to other
Parties except for the purpose of environmentally sound disposal. In addition, Parties can export those
chemicals to Parties subject to a specific exemption as well as to non-Parties that certify compliance
with the Convention’s provisions. In this regard, trade related measures constitute an important
supplementary element in promoting the protection of human health and the environment from POPs.
As mentioned above, the Stockholm Convention contains a wide range of measures to promote
the environmentally sound management of POPs. Article 5, for example, requires Parties to take
measures to reduce or eliminate releases from the unintentional production of POPs, including
developing national action plans to identify, characterize and address the release of these chemicals and
promote the development and use of substitute or modified materials, products, and processes. In
addition, Article 6 requires Parties to take measures to reduce or eliminate releases from stockpiles and
wastes – a significant measure in light of the large number of waste stockpiles and contaminated sites
containing persistent pesticides and PCBs, particularly in the developing world. The provision also calls
for close cooperation with the Basel Convention to, inter alia, establish levels of appropriate POPs
destruction and determine methods for their environmentally sounds disposal. Article 8 establishes the
procedures for the listing of new chemicals under the Convention.
The core measures of the Stockholm Convention are established in the context of other measures
that complement, reinforce, and balance them. Such measures include provisions on information
exchange and public information, as well as technical and financial assistance. Article 9, for instance,
mandates Parties to facilitate or undertake the exchange of information relevant to reduction or
elimination of POPs, with the aim of facilitating the implementation of the control measures and of
promoting the use of alternatives, and establishes a clearinghouse mechanism within the Secretariat to
facilitate POPs information exchange. Article 10 calls on Parties to, within their capabilities, promote
awareness of the risks of POPs, and Article 11 outlines the requirements to support and further develop
international programmes for conducting and financing POPs research, taking into account the special
needs of developing countries. Article 12 recognizes that timely and appropriate technical assistance in
response to requests is essential and calls for the establishment of regional and sub regional centres for
capacity building and transfer of technology to assist Parties in fulfilling their obligations under the
Convention, and Article 13 establishes a financial mechanism to ensure adequate and sustainable
financial resources to enable Parties to do so. Thus, trade related measures are only an element of a
broader framework of provisions established to pursue the goals established in the Convention.
Article 16 requires an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Convention to take place four years
after the Convention’s entry into force and periodically thereafter. Parties have agreed to complete the
first effectiveness evaluation by the fourth meeting of the COP scheduled for 2009. Similar to the
Rotterdam Convention, Article 17 calls for Parties to develop and approve procedures and mechanisms
for addressing compliance issues. These are still under negotiation by the Parties.

Conclusion
International law may be considered as an old tree, however it still develop new branches. One
of them is international environmental law, which can be compared with law of the sea, even the
international law of human rights. All of these branches have their different characteristics, but also
shared similarity of general international law.
One of the main purposes of international environmental law is that it aims to protect non-
human parts of the natural world, as well as humans: plants, animals, water, atmosphere, and systems
that contain several or all of these elements. It also includes the natural world as it has been altered by
human activities, such as landscapes. Although, it’s linked with the life and well being of humans, the
final objective of environmental law is outside the world of humans who create the legal system and
implement its norms. Stakeholders, as subject and object, and their relations to environmental elements
may have an important role to such play in environmental protection, but they are not the direct object
of such protection
2.2 Indian: Constitution of India-Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles of State Policy,
Fundamental Duties; Relevant Provisions of I. P. C., Cr. P. C., C. P. C., for preventing pollution;
The constitution of India is not an inert but a living document which evolves and grows with
time. The specific provisions on environment protection in the constitution are also result of this
evolving nature and growth potential of the fundamental law of the land. The preamble to our
constitution ensures socialist pattern of the society and dignity of the individual. Decent standard of
living and pollution free environment is inherent in this. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
defines environment as “environment includes water, air and land and the interrelationship which
exists among and between air, water and land and human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-
organism and property”.
The chapter on fundamental duties of the Indian Constitution clearly imposes duty on every
citizen to protect environment. Article 51-A (g), says that “It shall be duty of every citizen of India to
protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have
compassion for living creatures.”
The Directive principles under the Indian constitution directed towards ideals of building
welfare state. Healthy environment is also one of the elements of welfare state. Article 47 provides that
the State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the
improvement of public health as among its primary duties. The improvement of public health also
includes the protection and improvement of environment without which public health cannot be
assured. Article 48 deals with organization of agriculture and animal husbandry. It directs the State to
take steps to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines. In particular, it
should take steps for preserving and improving the breeds and prohibiting the slaughter of cows and
calves and other milch and draught cattle. Article 48 -A of the constitution says that “the state shall
endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the
country”.
The Constitution of India under part III guarantees fundamental rights which are essential for the
development of every individual and to which a person is inherently entitled by virtue of being human
alone. Right to environment is also a right without which development of individual and realisation of
his or her full potential shall not be possible. Articles 21, 14 and 19 of this part have been used for
environmental protection.
According to Article 21 of the constitution, “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal
liberty except according to procedure established by law”. Article 21 has received liberal interpretation
from time to time after the decision of the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India, (AIR
1978 SC 597). Article 21 guarantees fundamental right to life. Right to environment, free of danger of
disease and infection is inherent in it. Right to healthy environment is important attribute of right to
live with human dignity. The right to live in a healthy environment as part of Article 21 of the
Constitution was first recognized in the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs. State, AIR
1988 SC 2187 (Popularly known as Dehradun Quarrying Case). It is the first case of this kind in India,
involving issues relating to environment and ecological balance in which Supreme Court directed to
stop the excavation (illegal mining) under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. In M.C. Mehta vs.
Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086 the Supreme Court treated the right to live in pollution free
environment as a part of fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Excessive noise creates pollution in the society. The constitution of India under Article 19 (1) (a)
read with Article 21 of the constitution guarantees right to decent environment and right to live
peacefully. In PA Jacob vs. The Superintendent of Police Kottayam, AIR 1993 Ker 1, the Kerala High
Court held that freedom of speech under article 19 (1)(a) does not include freedom to use loud
speakers or sound amplifiers. Thus, noise pollution caused by the loud speakers can be controlled
under article 19 (1) (a) of the constitution.
Article 19 (1) (g) of the Indian constitution confers fundamental right on every citizen to practice
any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. This is subject to reasonable
restrictions. A citizen cannot carry on business activity, if it is health hazards to the society or general
public. Thus safeguards for environment protection are inherent in this. The Supreme Court, while
deciding the matter relating to carrying on trade of liquor in Cooverjee B. Bharucha Vs Excise
commissioner, Ajmer (1954, SC 220) observed that, if there is clash between environmental protection
and right to freedom of trade and occupation, the courts have to balance environmental interests with
the fundamental rights to carry on any occupations.
Public Interest Litigation under Article 32 and 226 of the constitution of India resulted in a wave
of environmental litigation. The leading environmental cases decided by the Supreme Court includes
case of closure of limestone quarries in the Dehradun region (Dehradun Quarrying case, AIR 1985 SC
652), the installation of safeguard at a chlorine plant in Delhi (M.C. Mehta V. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC
1037) etc. In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs. Union of India (1996) 5 SCC 647, the Court observed
that “the Precautionary Principle” and “the Polluter Pays Principle” are essential features of
“Sustainable Development.”
At local and village level also, Panchayats have been empowered under the constitution to take
measures such as soil conservation, water management, forestry and protection of the environment and
promotion of ecological aspect.
Environment protection is part of our cultural values and traditions. In Atharvaveda, it has been
said that “Man’s paradise is on earth; this living world is the beloved place of all; It has the blessings of
nature’s bounties; live in a lovely spirit”. Earth is our paradise and it is our duty to protect our paradise.
The constitution of India embodies the framework of protection and preservation of nature without
which life cannot be enjoyed. The knowledge of constitutional provisions regarding environment
protection is need of the day to bring greater public participation, environmental awareness,
environmental education and sensitize the people to preserve ecology and environment.

The Law of Torts

Though the law of torts, which is based on English common law principles is not a codified law in
India but it is perhaps the oldest law providing legal remedy against abatement of environmental
pollution.164 Environment related cases mostly involve negligence on the part of pollutant which is
decided applying the principle of absolute liability holding the polluter liable to pay damages to the
aggrieved parties. Explaining the implications of the doctrine of absolute liability in environmental
pollution cases, the Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta Vs Kamal Nath165observed:
“Pollution is a civil wrong by its very nature. It is a tort committed against the community as a
whole. A person who is guilty of causing pollution has to pay damages for the restoration of the
environment and ecology in addition to compensation as aforesaid. The person guilty of causing
pollution may also be held liable to pay exemplary damages so that it may act as a deterrent for others
not to cause pollution in any manner.”
 In this case, the untreated effluents discharged from the defendant’s Motel were polluting the
water of river Beas. The construction of the Motel also disturbed the natural flow of the river water and
caused damage to flora fauna and fisheries of that area. The respondent (owner of the Motel) was
directed to pay ten lakh rupees as compensation which the Court declared as Pollution Fine imposed on
the polluter as expenses for restoration of natural environment and ecology

Nuisance
Generally, the roots of modern environmental law lie in the Common Law relating to nuisance.
Ordinarily, the term ‘nuisance’ which has been derived from the French word nuire means ‘to injure’,
hurt or harm. Wharton’s Law Lexicon defines it as:
“Any unauthorized act which, without direct physical interference, materially impairs the use
and enjoyment by another of his property, or prejudicially affects his health, comfort, or convenience, is
a nuisance.”
According to Dr. Winfield, the deepest doctrinal roots of modern environment lie in the common
law principle of Nuisance. He defined nuisance as:
“An unlawful interference with the use and enjoyment of land or property or some right over or
in connection with it, and covers escape of deleterious things causing inconvenience to others.”
Nuisance may be through escape of water, fumes, smoke, foul gas, smell, noise, heat, vibrations,
disease, germs, electricity etc. Nuisance may either be public nuisance or private nuisance. The factors
to decide whether an annoyance or discomfort caused is sufficient to make out a case of nuisance or
not, are
(i) degree of intensity,
(ii) duration,
(iii) locality, and
(iv) mode of using the land/property.

Thus, in Vs. Lakshmipathy Vs State of Karnataka167the Kerala High Court held that water, air,
land and noise could cause hazardous kinds of nuisance which could not be permitted as they directly
affected the quality of environment which no one could be allowed to pollute.
In the case of Pakkle Vs P.Aiyasami Ganpathi the defendant laid salt pans in the tank which
belonged to the Government. It was held to be an act of nuisance as it polluted the tank water rendering
it harmful for bathing, drinking and other purposes. The defendant, in his defense had pleaded that
other persons had also laid their salt pans which were polluting the tank water rendering it unfit for
human consumption. The Court disallowed the plea and held that a person (i.e. defendant in this case)
cannot be allowed to continue an act causing nuisance to public health on the ground that others were
similarly causing the same nuisance. The Court, however, assured that action shall also be taken against
those others who were found guilty of having committed the same nuisance posing danger to public
health.
Recently the Supreme Court while dealing with the case Dr.BalwantSingh Vs Commissioner of
Police and others opined that the law on nuisance is well settled, Nuisance in any form as recognised in
the Law of Torts. Whether private public or common which results in affecting anyone’s personal or
land property rights gives him a cause of action/right to seek remedial measures in Court of law against
those who caused such nuisance to him and further gives him a right to obtain necessary reliefs both in
the form of preventing committing of nuisance and appropriate damages/compensation for the loss, if
sustained by him, due to causing of such nuisance.
The remedies available to the plaintiff in an action for nuisance are:
(i) Abatement of nuisance i.e. terminating the cause of nuisance by the affected party by
giving prior notice to the defendant and without causing danger or injury to his/her life or limb;
(ii) Damages (i.e. compensation);
Injunction, restraining the defendant from continuing the activity which is the cause of nuisance to the
plaintiff

Negligence
Negligence is another kind of tort where a remedy for environmental pollution lies. Ordinarily by
negligence we mean a breach of duty caused by the omission in doing something, i.e., carelessly or
negligently committing an act. As it has been stated that actionable negligence consists in the neglect of
the use of ordinary care or skill towards a person to whom the defendant owes the duty of observing
ordinary care and skill, by which neglect the plaintiff has suffered injury, to person or property.
Thus, in an action for negligence, the plaintiff must prove that (i) the defendant was under a duty
of care to the plaintiff, (ii) there was a breach of that duty by the defendant, and (iii) the plaintiff
suffered damages as a result of that breach.
Thus, in matters relating to environmental hazards, to establish the link between the negligent
act and the consequent results were taken by the judiciary. The Supreme Court ruling out any defence
against actions based on negligence of the defendant in M.C. Mehtav. Union of India observed that:
“Where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm
results to anyone on account of an accident in the operation of such hazardous or inherently dangerous
activity resulting, for example, in escape of toxic gas, the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to
compensate all those who are affected by the accident ”

Trespass
Trespass is another kind of common law remedy which in law of torts is very closely related to
nuisance but its use in environmental matters is very occasional. Trespass means intentional or
unlawful interference with the person, property or reputation of a person. Although nuisance and
trespass are, sometimes, considered on the same footing the difference lies in the context that trespass
is actionable per se, nuisance is actionable on proof of actual damage. While in trespass, the immediate
act itself which constitutes the offence occasions a prejudice or an injury to the sufferer's person or
property or amounts to dispossession, whereas in the case of nuisance, the act itself often does not
directly affect the person or property of another, but the consequences of such act become or are
prejudicial to his person or property. In case trespass the only requirement is that the plaintiff is to
establish that there is intentional interference on the land and upon proof an action for damages lies
and also the plaintiff is entitled to get relief by way of injunction.

Principle of Absolute Liability

There are, however, certain cases where the law imposes absolute liability on a person if he is
engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm results to anyone on account of an
accident in the operation of such hazardous or inherently dangerous activity. For instance, where there
was leakage of oleum gas from one of the units of Shriram Foods and Fertilizers Industries, the Court
held the industry absolutely liable for damages caused to the victims of the gas leakage.
The Court in this case i.e. Oleum Gas Leakage case laid down the principle that once the activity
carried on is proved to be hazardous or inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such activity is
liable to make good the loss caused to any other person or persons by his activity irrespective of the fact
whether he took reasonable care while carrying on his activity.
The Court observed:
“Any enterprise, engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activity has to indemnify all
those who suffer on account of such activity regardless of whether it is carried on carefully or not.”
Similarly, where the hazardous chemical industries had released highly toxic sludge and toxic untreated
waste water which had percolated deep into the soil rendering it unfit for cultivation and water unfit
for irrigation, human and animal consumption, resulting in untold misery to the surrounding villages,
the company was held liable to pay damages and bear the cost of restoring normal environmental and
ecology of the region.
In the case of Deepak Nitrates Ltd. Vs State of Gujarat the toxic effluents discharged by certain
industries into the treatment plant had exceeded the prescribed parameters fixed by the State Pollution
Control Board and thereby caused damage to the environment. The High Court ordered the industries
to pay one per cent of the maximum annual turnover of any of the preceding three years towards
compensation and improvement of environment within the specified period. On appeal against the
order of the High Court, the Supreme Court held that the industries were liable for the environmental
pollution caused by them on the polluter pays principle. Dismissing the appeal, the Court held that even
exemplary damages could have been ordered for the preservation of environment in such cases.
In Municipal Corporation, Delhi Vs Sushila Devi, a scooterist was killed due to sudden falling of a
tree on road. The trial court awarded damages to the wife of the deceased holding the Municipal
Corporation absolutely liable for the negligence in proper maintenance of trees on the sides of the road.
On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the finding of the trial court and observed that the Municipal
Corporation owes a duly to make the road safe for road- users and therefore, the Municipal
Corporation, Delhi was negligent in discharging its duties to road users. Decayed trees standing on road
side were held to be a danger for environmental protection and a nuisance to public using the road.
In Union Carbide Corporation Ltd. Vs Union of India,177commonly known as the Bhopal Tragedy
case, the Supreme Court applied the principle of absolute liability and held the Union Carbide
Corporation liable for the Methyl- iso-cynite (MIC) gas leakage from its plant at Bhopal in the midnight
of 2/3 December, 1984. The Court also ordered compensation for injuries to unborn children whose
congenital defects due to toxicity of MIC gas was traced even after twenty years of the said tragedy.
In essence, where any industry is found to cause environmental pollution due to its effluents,
emissions or any other hazardous/dangerous activity, the law expects a non-delegable duly on such
industry to prevent pollution and be prepared to face all the direct or indirect foreseeable
consequences and pay compensation, if there is any environmental pollution caused due to its activities
and also pay costs of restoring the pollution-free original environment.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Environmental pollution, besides being an actionable civil wrong of nuisance, may also be
punishable as an offence of public wrong under Section 268 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 if criminal
proceedings are initiated against the person causing pollution. There are certain offences specified in
Chapter XIV of the Indian Penal Code which affect the public health, safety, convenience which are
punishable under the law of crime as public nuisance.
According to Section 268 of IPC:
“A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does an actor is guilty of an illegal omission which
causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or people in general who dwell or occupy
property in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to
person who have occasion to use any public right.”
It is no defence to plead that the common nuisance was for some convenience or advantage and
therefore, it is excusable.
The aforesaid definition makes it sufficiently clear that any act or omission which tends to cause
any pollution, whether air, water, land, noise, shall be punishable as public nuisance under the Indian
Penal Code. The pollution cases which are covered under the offence of public nuisance include:
(1) an act of negligence which is likely to spread infectious diseases which are dangerous to
human health;178
(2) adulteration of drugs or medicinal preparations to reduce its efficacy;179
(3) fouling water of a public spring or resource;180
(4) making atmosphere noxious to human health.181
(5) negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substances.182
(6) negligent conduct with respect to fire or combustible matter;183
(7) negligent conduct with respect to explosive substances.184
(8) various types of mischief including mischief by killing or maiming animals.185

Section 289 of the Indian Penal Code further provides that if a person does not take sufficient
care of any animal or cattle in his possession, which is likely to endanger environment or human life, he
shall be liable to be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to
six months or with fine, which may extend to Rs. 1000-, or with both.
Disobedience of an injunction order to remove or abate the cause of any public nuisance
involving environmental pollution is also an offence punishable under Section 291 of IPC.

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. PC)

The provisions of public nuisance, relate to abatement of environmental pollution are contained
in Section 133 to 443 of Chapter X Part B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The expression
public nuisance has the same meaning for the purpose of Cr. PC as defined in Section 268 of the Indian
Penal Code.
Section 133 of Cr. PC empowers the District Magistrate and Sub- Divisional Magistrate to pass
conditional order for removal of public nuisance on receipt of a police report or any other information
received from some other source. The nature of the proceeding under Section 133 being entirely ex-
parte, they must record evidence before ordering removal or prohibition on public nuisance. They
should also record reasons for the decision. Since any nuisance cannot be allowed to continue unabated,
the proceedings under this section are summary in nature.
The remedy for removal/prohibition of cause of public nuisance under Section 133 Cr. PC is
provided because the civil suit takes a long time to decide the respective rights of parties and any
public nuisance cannot be allowed to continued for such a long time. However, the provisions of this
section can be invoked only when nuisance is actually in existence that is it is not a mere future
possibility or likelihood.
The Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs Kedia Leather &Liquor Ltd,
explained the scope and extent of Section 133 of Cr. PC in the context of Water Act, 1974 and Air Act,
1981, and held that the provisions of this section are preventive in nature as against the Water and Air
Pollution Control Acts, which are not only preventive but are also curative and penal in nature. The
provisions being mutually exclusive, the question of one replacing another does not arise. It therefore
follows that the provisions of Section 133 CrPC can be invoked for removal of public nuisance caused
due to discharge of toxic or untreated effluents’ and air discharge causing environmental pollution, but
such an order being essentially of a conditional nature, shall be essentially preventive.
The case of Ratlam Municipal Council Vs Vardhi Chand, involved duration of the grave
environmental pollution in the city of Ratlam which affected a large number of poor people and
residents. The problem of a number of causes such as private polluters, financial constraints
enforcement agencies, haphazard town planning etc. The Court directed the municipal authorities to
improve the drainage and sanitation to prevent environmental pollution and budgetary constraints
cannot be accepted as a valid ground for inaction on the part of the municipality.
The Court in this case observed that when the Magistrate initiates action under Section 133 Cr.
PC to abate the public nuisance, his order, if ignored or defied, would invoke penal provisions of Section
188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 which provides:
Whoever, knowingly disobeys order of Magistrate issued under Section 133 Cr. PC and if such
disobedience causes or tends to cause a riot or shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand
rupees or with both.
In this case, The Supreme Court upheld the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was affirmed
by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, and earned the petitioners that in case the order of the Sub-
Divisional Magistrate disobeyed, the officers responsible shall be prosecuted under Section 188 of the
Indian Penal Code and may also be liable to be punished for contempt of Court.
The Court directed the Municipality to curtail its budget on low-priority items and use the amount so
saved on sanitation and public health.

The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)

Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 also provides relief against environmental
pollution and a suit for declaration or injunction may be filed in a Civil Court. Sub-section (1) of Section
91 CPC provides that a suit for declaration or injunction or for such relief, as may be appropriate in the
circumstances of the case, may be instituted (a) by Advocate General, or (b) with the leave of the Court,
by two or more persons, even though no special damage has been caused to such persons by reason of
such public nuisance or environmental pollution.
The relief available under Section 91 (1) CPC is in addition to, and not in exclusion of any relief
available to the parties against pollution under any other statutory law for the time being in force,
subject to limitation that penalty for such offence is not more than two hundred rupees, which in the
modem context appears to be too meagre and wholly inadequate.
Order 1 Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 further provides for a representative suit which
can be filed by a particular group or association of persons who want to institute a collective action
against environmental pollution. However, as per the CPC amendment of 1976, the amended Order 1
Rule 8 requires three essential conditions for filing of a representative suit, which are as follows:
 (i) the suit must involve some collective right of a particular group of people or their
association, such as pollution of air or water in a particular locality.
(ii) the interest of the group/ association involved in the mater should be common; and
(iii) the representative suit or defence statement, as the case may be, can be filed only with
the prior permission of the Court.

2.3 Environment Protection Act, 1986, ECO-Mark, Environment Impact Assessment,

Environmental Audit, Public Participation in Environmental decision making, Environment
information, public hearing

ECO-Mark
 The Eco Mark may be defined as the label given to an Environment-Friendly Products.
 They are issued by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS)
 Household and other consumer products which meet certain environmental criteria along with
the quality requirements of the Indian Standards Institute for that product may be accredited
and labelled under this scheme.
 The eco-mark notification may be issued by the ministry of environment and forests, the
government of India.
 Till now, 18 notifications have been issued by the ministry of environment and forests on the
different product on the different criteria.
 There are mainly sixteen products which are covered under the Eco Mark scheme. They are as
follows- soaps and detergents, paper, food items, lubricating oils, packing materials,
architectural paints and electronic goods, food additives, wood substitutes, cosmetics, aerosol
propellants, plastic products, textiles, fire extinguisher and leather.

 Objectives of the Scheme:

 To provide an incentive for manufacturers and importers to reduce the adverse
environmental impact of products.
 To reward genuine initiatives by companies to reduce the adverse environmental impact
of their products.
 To assist consumers to become environmentally responsible in their daily lives by
providing information to take account of environmental factors in their purchase
decisions.
 To encourage citizens to purchase products which have less harmful environmental
impacts.
 Ultimately to improve the quality of the environment and to encourage the sustainable
management of resources

Environment Impact Assessment

 It had mainly commenced in the 1960s, as a part of increasing the environmental awareness.
 An environmental assessment (EA) is the assessment of the environmental consequences i.e.,
positive and negative of a plan, policy, program, or actual projects prior to the decision to move
forward with the proposed action.
 The term “environmental impact assessment” (EIA) is usually used when it is applied to
actual projects by individuals or the companies
 The term “strategic environmental assessment” (SEA) applies to policies, plans and programmes
which are most often proposed by organs of state.
 It may be governed by rules of administrative procedure regarding public participation and
documentation of decision making, and may also be subject to judicial review.
 The purpose of the environmental assessment is to ensure that the decision makers consider the
impacts of the environment while deciding whether or not to proceed with a project.

Environmental Audit
  Environmental auditing may be defined as the management tool which is designed to provide
information on the performance of the environment to the right people at the right time.
 Environment audit encompasses all kinds of activities which are related to the environmental
measures of an organisation.
 There are many features also such as management tool, the aim of an environmental audit,
systematic process, documentation, objective evolution, environmental performance etc.
 There are certain benefits of the environmental auditing such as- improves the efficiency of EMS,
risk mitigation, meeting stakeholders expectations, reduction in operational inefficiency,
employee awareness, helps management in decision making.
 EMS mainly stands for environmental management system which is a system which enables any
organisation irrespective of their size, type and settings.
 It ensures compliance with the regulations and also brings continual improvement.

Public Participation in Environmental decision making

 Public participation is a fundamental and important aspect of much administrative and
legislative decision making of environmental governance in democratic countries.
 The purpose of EIA is to inform the public of the proposed projects and its impacts. By informing
the public the public will also take the informed decision regarding the protection of the
environment.
 The potential benefits of Public participation are multifold as it can bring important information,
innovative approaches and solutions and enhance public perception of plans and helps make
projects viable.
 Public participation is an essential part of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process.
 But Public needs and grievances are not of concern to the state or project proponents. Accepting
genuine public participation in the design and implementation of projects is normally perceived
as a nuisance by decision-makers and investors. Adverse project impacts such as displacement,
environmental destruction and consequent depression in quality of life amongst the affected fail
to cause any distress to the expert decision makers
 Adverse project impacts such as displacement, environmental destruction and consequent
depression in quality of life amongst the affected fail to cause any distress to the expert decision
makers
 There are certain benefits of public participation such as- Process of decision-making and final
decisions become more transparent and legitimate, helps prevent or and adverse environmental
consequences of the decisions, PP generate more solutions and opinion to solving the problem,
For government and business costs of the possible wrong decision, could reducing significantly
 The Indian experience with Environmental Impact Assessment began over 20 years back.
 There are various stages of EIA. They are as follows- screening, scoping, assessment, EIA request
report, decision and monitoring.
 Environment assessment is the only weapon which leads to the sustainable development.
 Environment education should also be provided so that people should be aware of the
protection of the environment.
 An effective public participation programme does not happen by accident, it can only be done by
carefully planning it.
 Public participation can be done in various ways such as –media techniques, research
techniques, political techniques and large group meetings.

Environment Information
 It is a system which has been made do that the information is to be provided in various fields
such as researchers, academicians, policy planners, environmentalists, scientists, engineers and
the general public.
 As on October 2016 it consists of 70 centres which are housed in reputed institutions out of
which 30 centres dealing with “State of the Environment and Related Issues” and remaining 40
centres are mainly hosted by the environment-related governmental and non-governmental
 organisations/ institutes of professional excellence have thematic mandates, for instance,
Renewable Energy, Pollution Control, Hazardous Substance Management etc.
 The benefit of this Scheme is that a decentralized comprehensive information network functions
in the country to provide relevant and timely information to various users.
 It also provides interactive access to the environmental information electronically for each user
whenever they want it.
 EIS would not only provide backup support for conducting the developed research in the field of
the environment but it also provides a support system for decision making at National, State,
local bodies.
 It also supports the various missions undertaken by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and
Climate

 Its long-term objectives are as follows –

 To build up a repository and dissemination Centre in environmental science and
engineering.,
 To support and promote research, development and innovation in environmental
information technology, storage, retrieval and dissemination of environmental nature
 To gear up state-of-art technologies of information acquisition, processing
 Its short-term objectives are as follows –
 to provide national environmental information service relevant to present needs and
capable of meeting the future needs of the users, originators, processors and
disseminators of information
 to promote national and international cooperation and liaison for the exchange of
environment-related information,
 to promote national and international cooperation and liaison for the exchange of
environment-related information

Public Hearing
 The public hearing has mainly come from the major amendment to environment impact
assessment for the introduction of the public hearing as a part of assessment procedure to look
after that the local public is also taking part in the assessment of the environment developmental
activities.
 Public hearings are held as part of the public inquiry process. This provides interested parties
with the opportunity to expand on written submissions and to discuss inquiry issues with
Commissioners in a public forum.
 Any organisation or person can attend a hearing, either to speak to a submission or simply to
observe the proceedings.
 All the decision of the cases should be done within 30 days of the proposal.
 If the impact assessment division decides to hold further hearing then it has to be published in at
least 2 newspapers at least 30 days prior to the hearing.
 The recent amendment in the public hearing mainly means that hearings are to be conducted for
which the notification is applied.

UNIT 3: Laws and Pollution Control:

3.1 Air, Water, Noise, Soil and Marine Pollution Prevention and Legal Control of Pollution- Water
Act, 1974; Air Act, 1981; Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 etc.; Powers and Functions of the Board,
Penalty and Procedure, Role of Government – Central and state,
3.2 Doctrines- Polluter Pays Principle, Public Trust Principle, Sustainable Development Principle,
Precautionary Principle.
3.3 Legal remedies for environmental problems: Environmental Disputes and its Redressal
agencies: Environmental Tribunals, Public liability Insurance and Environment Relief Fund and
remedies under other laws;
 3.4 National Environment Appellate Authority –United Nations Initiatives, Civil Society and
Environment, Role of NGO’s (National and International Level) and Voluntary organizations;
3.5 National Green Tribunal Act, 2010: Jurisdiction, Power and Proceedings before tribunal; Role
of Judiciary in Environment Protection.

3.1 Air, Water, Noise, Soil and Marine Pollution Prevention and Legal Control of Pollution- Water
Act, 1974; Air Act, 1981; Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 etc.; Powers and Functions of the
Board, Penalty and Procedure, Role of Government – Central and state,

The water (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1974

Objectives
To provide for the prevention and control of water pollution; To maintain or restore
wholesomeness of water;
To establish pollution control boards; and
To confer on pollution control boards powers and functions relating to prevention and control of
water pollution.

Constitution of CPCB
Section 3 provides for constitution of CPCB. It consists of 17 members inclusive of 1 Chairperson
and 1 Member Secretary.
The post of Member Secretary is most crucial as he is the only one whose tenure is not fixed. He
holds office till superannuation or till he is removed from his post by the concerned authority.
Other member’s tenure is fixed as 3 years from the date of nomination.

Out of the 17 members:

 Not more than 5 official members would be nominated by the Central Government to represent
different departments of Government of India.
 Not more than 3 non-official members would be nominated by the Central Government to
represent interests of agriculture, fishery or industry or trade or any other interest which, in the
opinion of the Central Government, ought to be represented.
 1 persons to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by the
Central Government, to be nominated by that Government.
 Not more than 5 members to be nominated by the Central Government from amongst the
members of State Boards, of whom not more than 2 members represent local governments.
 1 full-time chairman, being a person having special knowledge or practical experience in respect
of matters relating to environmental protection or a person having knowledge and experience in
administering institutions dealing with the matters aforesaid, to be nominated by the Central
Government.
 1 full-time member-secretary, possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of scientific,
engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the Central
Government.
The Central Government nominates all the above members.

Constitution of SPCB
SPCB also consists of 17 members inclusive of Chairman and Member Secretary. Out of 17
members:
1 chairman, being a person having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of
matters relating to environmental protection or a person having knowledge and experience in
administering institutions dealing with the matters aforesaid, to be nominated by the State
Government.

The chairman may be either whole-time or part-time as the State Government may think fit.
5 official members to be nominated by the State Government to represent that Government; 5
members to be nominated by the State Government from amongst the members of the local authorities
functioning within the State;
 3 non-official members to be nominated by the State Government to represent the interest of
agriculture, fishery or industry or trade or any other interest which, in the opinion of the State
Government, ought to be represented;
2 persons to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by the
State Government, to be nominated by that Government;
1 full-time member-secretary, possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of scientific,
engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the State Government.

It is to be noted that if SPCB is already constituted then there is no need of reconstitution.

Constitution of JPCB
Section 13 of the Water Act provides for the Constitution of Joint Boards. This section provides
for two types of Joint Boards.
a. A Joint Board created by agreement between two or more governments of contiguous states.
b. A Joint Board created by agreement between the Central Government (in respect of one or more
UTs) and one or more governments of State contiguous to such UT or UTs.

A Joint Board constituted in pursuance of an agreement between two or more governments of

contiguous states, shall consist of following members:
 Full-time chairman, nominated by the Central Government;
 Two officials from each of the participating States to be nominated by the concerned
participating State Government to represent that Government;
 One person to be nominated by each of the participating State Governments from amongst the
members of the local authorities functioning within the State concerned;
 one non-official to be nominated by each of the participating State Governments to represent the
interests of agriculture, fishery or industry or trade in the State concerned or any other interest
which, in the opinion of the participating State Government, is to be represented;
 Two persons to be nominated by the Central Government to represent the companies or
corporations owned, controlled or managed by the participating State Government;
 A full-time member-secretary, possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of scientific,
engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the Central
Government.

A Joint Board constituted in pursuance of an agreement the Central Government (in respect of one or
more UTs) and one or more governments of State contiguous to such UT or UTs, shall consist of the
following members:
 a full-time chairman to be nominated by the Central Government;
 two officials to be nominated by the Central Government from the participating Union territory
or each of the participating union territories, as the case may be, and two officials to be
nominated, from the participating State or each of the participating States, as the case may be by
the concerned participating State Government;
 one person to be nominated by the Central Government from amongst the members of the local
authorities functioning within the participating Union territory or each of the participating
Union territories, as the case may be and one person to be nominated, from amongst the
members of the local authorities functioning within the participating State or each of the
participating States, as the case may be, by the concerned participating State Government;
 one non-official to be nominated by the Central Government and one person to be nominated by
the participating State Government or State Governments to represent the interests of
agriculture, fishery or industry or trade in the Union territory or in each of the Union territories
or the State or in each of the States, as the case may be, or any other interest which in the opinion
of the Central Government or, as the case may be, of the State Government is to be represented.
 two persons to be nominated by the Central Government to represent the companies or
corporations owned, controlled or managed by the Central Government and situate in the
participating Union territory or territories and two persons to be nominated by Central
 Government to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by the
participating State Governments;
 a full-time member-secretary, possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of scientific,
engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the Central
Government.

Functions of CPCB
Water Act under Section 16 provides for functions of CPCB. The main function of the Central Board is to
promote cleanliness of streams & wells in different areas of state. Some other functions are as follows:
a. advise the Central Government on any matter relating to the prevention& control of water
pollution;
b. plan and execute a nation-wide programme for the prevention, control or abatement of water
pollution;
c. co-ordination the activities of the State Board and resolve disputes among them;
d. provide technical assistance and guidance to the State Boards, carry out and sponsor
investigations and research relating to problems of water pollution and prevention, control or
abatement of water pollution;
e. plan and organize the training of person engaged in programmes for the prevention, control or
abatement of water pollution;
f. organize comprehensive programmes regarding the prevention& control of water pollution
through mass media;
g. lay down, modify or annul the standards for a stream or well;
h. The Central Board may establish or recognize a laboratory or laboratories to enable the CPCB to
perform the above functions;
i. Perform such other functions as may be prescribed.

Powers of CPCB
The CPCB is vested with the following powers:
1. CPCB is empowered by Section 18 of the Water Act, to give directions to SPCB.
2. The CPCB has powers to perform any other functions of the SPCB in case of noncompliance of
any directions given by the CPCB.
3. The CPCB is empowered to issue any direction under 33A including the power to direct:
a. The closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or
b. Stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other service.

Functions of SPCB
Water Act under Section 17 provides for functions of SPCB. The functions are as follows:
a. to plan a comprehensive programme for the prevention, control or abatement of pollution of
streams and wells in the state;
b. to advise the State Government on any matter concerning the prevention, control or abatement
of water pollution;
c. to collect and disseminate information relating to prevention, control or abatement of water
pollution;
d. to encourage, conduct and participate in investigations and research relating to problems of
water pollution and prevention, control or abatement of water pollution;
e. to collaborate with the Central Board in organising the training of persons engaged or to be
engaged in programmes relating to prevention, control or abatement of water pollution and to
organise mass education programmes relating thereto;
f. to evolve economical and reliable methods of treatment of sewage and trade effluents, having
regard to the peculiar conditions of soils, climate and water resources of different regions and
more especially the prevailing flow characteristics of water in streams and wells which render it
impossible to attain even the minimum degree of dilution;
g. to evolve methods of utilisation of sewage and suitable trade effluents in agriculture;
h. to evolve efficient methods of disposal of sewage and trade effluents on land;
 i. to lay down standards of treatment of sewage and trade effluents to be discharged into any
particular stream;
j. to lay down effluent standards to be complied with by persons while causing discharge of
sewage or sullage;
k. To advice the State Government with respect to the location of any industry the carrying on of
which is likely to pollute a stream or well.

Powers of SPCB
The SPCB is conferred with very important powers like:
a. Power to make application to Court for restraining persons from causing Water Pollution
(Section 33);
b. Power to Entry and Inspection: under Section 23, any person empowered by the SPCB shall have
a right to enter any place at all reasonable times for performing any of the functions of SPCB as
prescribed by the Act.
c. Power to obtain information (Section 20);
d. Power to take samples of effluents for analysis (Section 21);
e. Power to give Directions: SPCB may issue any direction in writing to any person, Officer or any
authority and such person, Officer or authority shall be bound to comply with such directions.
The power to issue any direction includes the power to direct:

The closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or

Stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other service.

Comparison between Air Act & Water Act

1. The provision for penalties under both the Acts is similar.
2. The constitution and composition of CPCB & SPCB under both the Acts is similar but Air Act
provides that if SPCB is not constituted as per the provisions of Water Act then while
constituting SPCB there will be 2 extra members who have expertise in environment matters or
practical experiences in cases of Air Pollution.
3. Water Act was enacted by the Parliament in exercise of its powers under Article 252 of the
Constitution (12 states gave consent) whereas, Air Act was enacted by the Parliament in exercise
of its powers under Article 253 of the Constitution.
4. The provision for declaration of an area as pollution control area is available only under Air Act
& not under Water Act.
5. The provision for constitution of Joint Pollution Control Board is available only in Water Act &
not under Air Act.
6. There are 64 sections and 8 chapters in the Water Act whereas Air Act has only 54 Sections & 7
chapters.
7. The Water Act was enacted in the year 1974 whereas the Air Act came into force only in the year
1981.

The air (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1981

Air pollution has been described as the imbalance in the quality of air, which causes ill effects.
To legally combat the problems created as a result of air pollution, the Parliament of India enacted a
statute in the year 1981 named as ‘The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act in the exercise of
its power under Article 253 of the Constitution.
This is the first act enacted which is preventive in nature, before this act, all other acts were
punitive in nature.

Objectives
a. To provide for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution;
b. For the establishment of Pollution Control Boards;
c. For conferring and assigning powers and functions on such Boards;
d. To implement the decisions taken at Stockholm Conference, 1972; and
e. To lay down standards to maintain the quality of air.
Definitions
Section 2(a) defines air pollutant as “as any solid, liquid or gaseous substance (including noise)
present in the atmosphere in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to human beings or
other living creatures or plants or property or environment”.
Section 2(b) defines air pollution as “the presence in the atmosphere of any air pollutant’.

Authorities under this Act

The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) constituted under Section 3 of Water (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of CPCB for the
Prevention and Control of Air Pollution under the Air Act.
The CPCB shall also exercise the powers and perform the functions of the State Boards in Union
Territories; or it may delegate such powers and functions to any person or body of persons as the
Central Government may specify.
The SPCB constituted by the State under Section 4 of Water (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Act, 1974 shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of SPCB for the prevention and
control of air pollution under the Air Act.
In any State in which the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 is not in force
the State Government shall constitute a SPCB for the Prevention and Control of Air Pollution.

Constitution of CPCB
CPCB consists of 17 members inclusive of 1 Chairperson and 1 Member Secretary.
The post of Member Secretary is most crucial as he is the only one whose tenure is not fixed. He
holds office till superannuation or till he is removed from his post by the concerned authority.
Other member’s tenure is fixed as 3 years from the date of nomination.

Out of the 17 members:

 Not more than 5 official members would be nominated by the Central Government to
represent different departments of Government of India.
 Not more than 3 non-official members would be nominated by the Central Government to
represent interests of agriculture, fishery or industry or trade or any other interest which,
in the opinion of the Central Government, ought to be represented.
 2 persons to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by
the Central Government, to be nominated by that Government.
 Not more than 5 members to be nominated by the Central Government from amongst the
members of State Boards, of whom not more than 2 members represent local
governments.
 1 full-time chairman, being a person having special knowledge or practical experience in
respect of matters relating to environmental protection or a person having knowledge
and experience in administering institutions dealing with the matters aforesaid, to be
nominated by the Central Government.
 1 full-time member-secretary, possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of
scientific, engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the
Central Government.
If any member is absent in 3 consecutive meetings of the board without any valid reason then he’ll be
removed but this provision is not applicable to member secretary.

Constitution of SPCB
SPCB also consisits of 17 members inclusive of Chairman and Member Secretary.

Out of 17 members:
 1 chairman, being a person having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of
matters relating to environmental protection or a person having knowledge and
experience in administering institutions dealing with the matters aforesaid, to be
nominated by the State Government.
  The chairman may be either whole-time or part-time as the State Government may think
fit.
 5 official members to be nominated by the State Government to represent that
Government;
 5 members to be nominated by the State Government from amongst the members of the
local authorities functioning within the State;
 3 non-official members to be nominated by the State Government to represent the
interest of agriculture, fishery or industry or trade or any other interest which, in the
opinion of the State Government, ought to be represented;
 2 persons to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by
the State Government, to be nominated by that Government;
 1 full-time member-secretary, possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of
scientific, engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the
State Government.
It is to be noted that if SPCB is already constituted then there is no need of reconstitution.

Nature of CPCB and SPCB

a. Both CPCB and SPCB possess corporate personality. They are deemed as ‘legal person’ as they
have power to acquire, purchase and sell any property.
b. They can sue any party or person and can be sued in the name of CPCB or SPCB.

Case Laws
Mahabir Coke Industries v. SPCB.
There is a provision in Air Act that SPCB can inspect any industry to see that whether pollution
control devices are properly installed or not. Also SPCB is obligated to prescribe certain standards to be
followed by every industry.
Herein, SPCB got the information that pollution control devices are not used by the industry and
the same was found on inspection. SPCB recommended the State Government to stop the activities of
the industry.
HC gave a restrictive interpretation and held that if there is a provision for prescribing
standards, then SPCB should first prescribe the standards and then carry out the inspection.

MurliDeora v. Union of India

In this SC analysed whether Parliament has enacted any law regarding smoking in public.
SC found out that there are persons who are not smoking but are affected by smokers because of
passive smoking and therefore restricted public smoking and also introduced fines in case of violation.
The SC did not take the element of air pollution strictly but gave the judgment on grounds of
Article 21.
SC further observed that a State Act of Delhi i.e. Delhi Prohibition of Smoking and Non-Smokers
Health Protection Act, 2003 was in operation and directed that there should be such an Act at the
Central Level.
At present there is Central Law regarding Public Smoking. The Cigarette and other Tobacco
Products Act, 2004 prohibits various things such as sponsorship, advertisement and sale of cigarette to
a person below 18 years of age.

M.C. Mehta v. UOI

Herein, the SC introduced the use of CNG in automobiles and held that cities where pollution is
very high then the automobiles should Euro 1 and Euro 2 technology.

Structure under Air Act

Chapter I: Preliminary
Chapter II: Central and State Boards for the Prevention and Control of Air Pollution
Chapter III: Powers and Functions of Boards
Chapter IV: Prevention and Control of Air Pollution Chapter
V: Funds, Accounts and Audit
 Chapter VI: Penalties and Procedures Chapter
VII: Miscellaneous

Functions of CPCB
Air Act under Section 16 provides for functions of CPCB. The main function of the Central Board
is to improve the quality of air and to prevent, control or abate air pollution in the country. Some other
functions are as follows:
a. advise the Central Government on any matter concerning the improvement of the quality of air
and the prevention, control or abatement of air pollution;
b. plan and cause to be executed a nation-wide programme for the prevention, control or
abatement of air pollution;
c. co-ordination the activities of the State Board and resolve disputes among them;
d. provide technical assistance and guidance to the State Boards, carry out and sponsor
investigations and research relating to problems of air pollution and prevention, control or
abatement of air pollution;
e. plan and organize the training of person engaged or to engaged in programmes for the
prevention, control or abatement of air pollution on such terms and conditions as the Central
Board may specify;
f. organize through mass media a comprehensive programme regarding the prevention, control or
abatement of air pollution;
g. lay down standards for the quality of air;
h. collect and disseminate information in respect of matters relating to air pollution;
i. The Central Board may establish or recognize a laboratory or laboratories to enable the Central
Board to perform its functions under this section efficiently.
j. The Central Board may delegate any of its functions under this Act generally or specially to any
of the Committees appointed by it;
k. do such other things and perform such other acts as it may think necessary for the proper
discharge of its functions and generally for the purpose of carrying into effect the purposes of
this Act.

Powers of CPCB
Section 31 A provides that CPCB may issue any direction in writing to any person, Officer or any
authority and such person, Officer or authority shall be bound to comply with such directions. The
power to issue any direction includes the power to direct:
a. The closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or
b. Stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other service.

Functions of SPCB
Air Act under Section 17 provides for functions of SPCB. The functions are as follows:
a. to plan a comprehensive programme for the prevention, control or abatement of air pollution
and to secure the execution thereof;
b. to advise the State Government on any matter concerning the prevention, control or abatement
of air pollution;
c. to collect and disseminate information relating to air pollution;
d. to inspect, at all reasonable times, any control equipment, industrial plant or manufacturing
process ;
e. to organize mass-education program relating to prevention, control or abatement of air
pollution;
f. to inspect air pollution control areas to such intervals as it may think necessary, assess the
quality of air therein and take steps for the prevention, control or abatement of air pollution in
such areas;
g. to advise the State Government with respect to the suitability of any premises or location for
carrying or any industry which is likely to cause air pollution;
h. to perform such other functions as may be prescribed or as may, from time to time, be entrusted
to it by the Central Board or the State Government;
 i. A State Board may establish or recognize a laboratory or laboratories to enable the State Board
to perform its functions under this section efficiently.

Powers of SPCB
The SPCB is conferred with very important powers like:
a. Power to grant, refuse and cancel consent: Section 21 of the Air Act provides that no person
shall establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area, without the
consent of the SPCB. The SPCB may on receipt of the application for consent and after making
such enquiry may grant or refuse consent.
b. Power to make application to Court for restraining persons from causing Air Pollution
c. Power to take remedial measures to mitigate the emission of Air Pollutants.
d. Power to Entry and Inspection: under Section 24, any person empowered by the SPCB shall have
a right to enter any place at all reasonable times for performing any of the functions of SPCB as
prescribed by the Act.
e. Power to obtain information: for carrying out the functions entrusted to the SPCB it may call for
any information from the occupier or any other person carrying on any industry or operating
any control equipment or industrial plant. The officials of PSCB also have right to inspect the
premises for verifying the correctness of such information.
f. Power to take samples of Air or Emission: any officer empowered by the SPCB shall have the
power to take samples of air or emission from any chimney, flue or duct or any other outlet in
manner prescribed under Section 26 of the Air Act.
g. Power to give Directions: SPCB may issue any direction in writing to any person, Officer or any
authority and such person, Officer or authority shall be bound to comply with such directions.
The power to issue any direction includes the power to direct:

 The closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or

 Stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other service.

Penalties and Procedure (Section 37 – Section 46)

Section 37 prescribes punishment for failure to comply with the provisions of Section 21 or
Section 22 or with the directions issued under Section 31A. a person contravening the mentioned
provisions shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term not less than 1 year and 6 months, which
may extend up to 6 years with fine
In case, the failure continues, he shall be punishable with an additional fine which may extend to
5000 rupees for every day during which the failure continues.
The section further provides that if the failure continues beyond a period of 1 year after the date
of conviction, the offender shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less
than 2 years but which may extend to 7 years and with fine.

Section 38 prescribes punishment for acts not covered under Section 37. This section provides
that any person who commits the acts listed herein shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to 3 months or fine which may extend to rupees 10,000 or both. Example of offences
under Section 38: non-furnishing of any information which a person is required to give under this Act;
to damage any works or property belonging to the Board; presentation of false documents for obtaining
NOC etc.

Section 39 is a residuary clause which provides punishments for those acts or omissions which
have not been covered by Sections 37 and 38 of the Act.

Section 40 provides that where an offence has been committed by a company then every person
who, at the time offence was committed was directly in charge of, and was responsible to the company
for the conduct of the business shall be deemed to be guilty and punished accordingly.
But such person can be absolved of his liability if he can prove that:
a. The offence was committed without his knowledge; or
b. That he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.
 Section 40(2) provides that if it is proved that the offence was committed with the consent or
knowledge of any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, then such person shall
also be deemed guilty of the offence and be punished accordingly.
As per the section ‘company’ means any body corporate, and includes a firm or other
associations of individuals; ‘director’ in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm.
In the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. J.B. Bottling Company Private Limited it has been
held that since the punishment of imprisonment could not be awarded to a juristic person like a
company, only fine can be imposed on it.

Section 41 provides that where an offence has been committed by any department of the
Government, the Head of the Department shall be deemed guilty of the offence and accordingly
punished.
But the Head of the Department can be absolved of his liability if he can prove that:
a. The offence was committed without his knowledge; or
b. That he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.

Similarly, if an offence is committed by a department of the Government and if it is proved that

the offence was committed with the consent or knowledge of any officer other than the Head of the
Department, then such officer shall also be deemed guilty of the offence and be punished accordingly.
It makes it clear that the liability of the Head of the Department is independent.

Sections 42 and 44 provide protection to the members and officers of the Boards.

Section 42 provides that an act done by the employee or member of the Board or officer of Government
will not be punishable if done in good faith.

Section 44 provides that all members, officers and other employees of the Board acting in pursuance of
any provisions of this Act would be deemed to be public servants within the meaning of Section 21 of
IPC.

Section 43 provides that no Court inferior to that of Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate
Court shall try an offence punishable under the Air Act. Also the cognizance can be taken only when the
complaint is made by:
a. The Board or any officer authorised on this behalf;
b. Any person who has given notice of not less than 60 days to the Board or officer authorised
declaring his intention to make a complaint.

Section 46 provides that where an appeal lies to an appellate authority constituted under the Act, no
civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain a suit or suit or proceeding in this behalf. Further, the
Court shall not determine or issue injunction against any court or authority in respect of the action
taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act.

Features of Air Act

Section 22 if SPCB has specified some standards or limitations then the industrialists are bound
by such standards or limitations.
Section 22A gives power to the board to initiate proceedings in court of law not below Judicial
Magistrate regd. prevention of air pollution even against private individuals.
Section 23 provides that any person or agency can furnish information to the StateBoard regd
emission of air pollutants into the atmosphere in excess of the standards laid down by the State Board.
Section 24 provides to any person empowered by the StateBoard a right to enter any place at all
reasonable times for purpose of performing any functions of the board.
Section 31A: written above

Environment protection act, 1986

 EP Act was enacted by the Parliament in the year 1986. This Act was enacted with the object of
providing for the protection and improvement of environment and related matters.

Objectives
a. To implement decisions taken at Stockholm Conference, 1972;
b. To take appropriate steps for the protection and improvement of human environment; and
c. To prevent hazards to human beings, other living creatures, plants and property.

Definitions
Section 2(a) defines ‘environment’ as that which includes water, air and land and the
interrelationship which exists among and between water, air and land and human beings, other living
creatures, plants, microorganism and property.
Section 2(b) defines ‘environment pollutant’ as any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in
such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment.
Section 2(c) defines ‘environment pollution’ as the presence in the environment of any
environment pollutant.

Important Provisions
Section 3of the EPA has prescribed certain powers which the Central Govt. shall have for the
purpose of protecting and improving the quality of environment and preventing, controlling and
abating environmental pollution. Some of the powers are:
 To coordinate actions taken by the State Governments, Officers and other Authorities under the
EP Act or under the Environment Protection Rules.
 To plan and execute a nationwide program for the prevention, control and abatement of
environmental pollution.
 To lay down standards for the quality of environment.
 To restrict areas in which any industries or operations or processors shall be carried out. To lay
down procedures a d safeguards for the handling of hazardous substances.
 To collect and disseminate information relating to environmental pollution.

Section 4 has conferred on the Central Government power to appoint Officers for the purpose of
entrusting on them such of the powers and functions prescribed under the EP Act.

Section 5 conferred power on the Central Government to issue directions in writing to any
person, Officer or any authority and such person, Officer or authority shall be bound to comply with
such directions. Under this Section, the Central Government has the power to issue directions for:
a. The closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or
b. Stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other service.

Section 6 has empowered the Central Government to make rules to regulate environmental
pollution but such rules are to be published in official gazette by notification. Such rules may include:
Standards of quality of air, water or soil for various areas and purposes;
The procedures and safeguards for handling of hazardous substances in hazardous areas; The
maximum allowable limits of concentration of various environmental pollutants (including noise) for
different areas;
The prohibition and restriction on the location of industries and the carrying on processes and
operations in different areas.

Section 23 confers powers on Central Government to delegate its powers and functions under
this Act to any officer, State Government or other authority as it may deem necessary by notification in
the Official Gazette with the limitation that it cannot delegate its power under Section 25 and Section
3(3).

Section 25 confers powers on Central Government to makes rules regarding specific matters by
publishing the same in Official Gazette.
 The Environment Protection Rules, 1986 are made by the Central Government in exercise of the
powers conferred by Section 25. Also rules like Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules,
1989; Manufacture, storage and import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989; Bio-medical wastes
(Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 are made by the Central Government in exercise of the powers
conferred by Section 25.

3.2 Doctrines- Polluter Pays Principle, Public Trust Principle, Sustainable Development
Principle, Precautionary Principle

Polluter Pays Principle

Polluter Pays Principle has become a popular catchphrase in recent times. 'If you make a mess,
it's your duty to clean it up'- this is the main basis of this slogan. It should be mentioned that in
environmental law, the 'polluter pays principle' does not refer to "fault." Instead, it favors a curative
approach which is concerned with repairing ecological damage. It's a principle in international
environmental law where the polluting party pays for the damage done to the natural environment. It is
regarded as a regional custom because of the strong support it has received in most Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and European Community (EC) countries.
International environmental law itself mentions little about the principle.

In recent days, the polluter pays principle is seen as a way of internalizing pollution-related costs
within the context of the economic rationality of the enterprise. There is a close relationship between a
country's environmental policy and its overall socioeconomic policy. Furthermore, under this principle
it is not the responsibility of government to meet the costs involved in either prevention of
environmental damage, or in carrying out remedial action, because the effect of this would be to shift
the financial burden of the pollution incident to the taxpayer. But State practice does not support the
view that all de-pollution costs should be borne by the polluter, particularly where transnational
dispute is involved.

The first major reference to the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) appeared 1972 in the OECD
Guiding Principles Concerning International Economic Aspects of Environmental Policies (henceforth
called OECD Guiding Principles). The PPP as a guiding principle across countries became necessary
because some countries faced complaints by national firms about rising costs and a loss of international
competitiveness following a national implementation of the PPP within their borders. The OECD
Guiding Principles defines the PPP as an instrument for "... allocating costs of pollution prevention and
control measures".

The polluter should bear these costs in order to achieve and maintain a "... acceptable state of
environment" which is determined by the public authorities. The OECD Guiding Principles also state
that the PPP should "... not be accompanied by subsidies that would create significant distortions in
international trade and investment." This weak or standard definition of the PPP neither requires
polluters to bear the costs of accidental damages, nor do they have to pay for residual pollution.

The range of costs to be borne by the polluter has expanded over time. In 1989, the OECD
suggested extending the PPP in order to cover the costs of accident prevention and to internalize the
environmental costs caused by accidents. In 2001, the OECD Joint Working Party on Agriculture and
Environment stated that according to the PPP

"... the polluter should be held responsible for environmental damage caused and bear the
expenses of carrying out pollution prevention measures or paying for damaging the state of the
environment where the consumptive or productive activities causing the environmental damage are
not covered by property rights." This version of the PPP is referred to as the extended or strong PPP in
the literature.

In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action & Ors v. Union of India, (Bichhri Village case) the
Supreme Court accepted the Polluter Pays principle. In this case, some chemical factories in Bichhri
(Udaipur District) produced hazardous chemicals like oleum etc. These industries did not have the
requisite clearances, licences, etc. nor did they have necessary equipment for the treatment of
discharged toxic effluents. Toxic sludge and untreated waste waters resulted in the percolation of toxic
substances into the bowels of the Earth. Aquifers and subterranean supplies of water got polluted; wells
and streams turned dark and dirty; water not only became unfit for human consumption but also unfit
for cattle to drink and for irrigation of land. So much so, even the soil became unfit for cultivation.
Death, disease and other disasters gradually resulted and the villagers in the area revolted as a result of
this enormous environmental degradation. The District Magistrate of the area had to resort to Section
144 of the Criminal Procedure Code to avoid any untoward incident.

A writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution was filed in the Supreme Court and the Court
asked for a report to be prepared by the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute
(NEERI) as to the choice and scale of available remedial alternatives. NEERI suggested the application of
the Polluter Pays principle in as much as “the incident involved deliberate release of untreated acidic
process waste water and negligent handling of waste sludge knowing fully well the implication of such
acts.” The cost of restoration was expected to be in the region of Rs. 40 crores. The Supreme Court
examined all the available material and concluded that the industries alone were responsible for the
damage to the soil, underground water and the village in general.

The Supreme Court endorsed the Polluter Pays principle. It was said, “The Polluter Pays
Principle as interpreted by this Court means that the absolute liability for harm to the environment
extends not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the environmental
degradation. Remediation of damaged environment is part of the process of sustainable development.”

The Supreme Court held that as per the Polluter Pays principle “… once the activity carried on is
hazardous or inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such activity is liable to make good the loss
caused to any other person by his activity irrespective of the fact whether he took reasonable care while
carrying on his activity. The rule is premised on the very nature of the activity carried on.”

The Supreme Court cited with approval the following passage pertaining to the Polluter Pays
principle: - “The Polluter Pays principle demands that the financial costs of preventing or remedying
damage caused by pollution should lie with the undertakings which cause the pollution, or produce the
goods which cause the pollution. Under the principle it is not the role of Government to meet the costs
involved in either prevention of such damage, or in carrying out remedial action, because the effect of
this would be to shift the financial burden of the pollution incident to the taxpayer.”

Adopting this principle, the Supreme Court directed that “The task of determining the amount
required for carrying out the remedial measures, its recovery/realization and the task of undertaking
the remedial measures is placed upon the Central Government.” It was directed that the amount so
determined should be recovered from the polluting industries.

The villagers were permitted to file suits for recovery of damages, but more importantly, the
Supreme Court accepted the principle of absolute liability laid down in the Oleum Gas Leak case and
also approved the suggestion for setting up Environmental Courts.

While applying the principle of Polluter Pays, the Supreme Court later expressed the view that
compensation to be awarded must have some correlation not only with the magnitude and capacity of
the enterprise but also the harm caused by it. The applicability of the principle of Polluter Pays should
be practical, simple and easy in application.

In the M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors (Calcutta Tanneries Case), the Polluter Pays principle
relating to relocation of industries was applied with a direction to those relocated industries to pay
25% of the cost of land. Those who did not pay for the cost of land were directed to be closed. The
Supreme Court again resorted to directions earlier given in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum for setting
up effluent treatment plants.

It needs to be mentioned that a strict interpretation of the Polluter Pays principle requires that
the polluter should pay for causing the pollution and consequential costs for any general deterioration
of the environment while another view is that the polluter is only responsible for paying the costs of
pollution control measures. Generally speaking, the polluter must pay for
• The cost of pollution abatement.
• The cost of environment recovery.
• Compensation costs for victims of damages if any, due to pollution.

In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, Resultantly, the Supreme Court recognized
Sustainable Development, the Precautionary Principle and the Polluter Pays principle as a part of our
environmental jurisprudence.

Public Trust Doctrine

Another major principle accepted by the Supreme Court is the public trust doctrine for the
protection of natural resource. This doctrine came up for consideration in the M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath.

A rather unusual situation had arisen in this case. The flow of the river Beas was deliberately
diverted because it used to flood Span Motels in the Kulu Manali valley in which a prominent politician's
family had a direct interest. The motel was also allotted protected forestland by the State Government
and had also encroached on protected forestland, which encroachment was subsequently regularized.

The Supreme Court used the public trust doctrine in this case to restore the environment to its
original condition. Briefly, this doctrine postulates that the public has a right to expect that certain lands
and natural areas will retain their natural characteristics.

Applying the public trust doctrine, the Supreme Court cancelled the lease of forestland granted
in favour of Span Motels and the State Government was directed to take over the area and restore it to
its original condition. The motel was directed to pay compensation (damages for restitution of the
environment and ecology of the area). It was also asked to show cause why a pollution fine be not
imposed.

While deciding the show cause notice regarding imposition of a pollution fine, the Supreme
Court held that in law the fine could not be imposed without a trial and a finding that the motel is guilty
of an offence under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Accordingly, no pollution
fine was imposed on Span Motels but it was asked to show cause why it should not pay exemplary
damages. After considering the reply of Span Motels, exemplary damages of Rs.10 lakhs were imposed.

Roman law recognized the public trust doctrine whereby common properties such as rivers,
seashore, forests and the air were held by the Government in trust for free and unimpeded use of the
public. These resources were either owned by no one (res nullious) or by everyone in common (res
communious).

In English law, the public trust doctrine is more or less the same but with an emphasis on certain
interests such as navigation, commerce and fishing which are sought to be preserved for the public.
There is, however, some lack of clarity in this regard on the question whether the public has an
enforceable right to prevent the infringement of the interests in common properties like the seashore,
highways and running water.

The public trust doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like air, sea
waters and the forests have such a great importance to the people as a whole that it would be wholly
unjustified to make them a subject of private ownership. The said resources being a gift of nature, they
should be made freely available to everyone irrespective of the status in life. The doctrine enjoins upon
the government to protect the resources for the enjoyment of the general public rather than to permit
their use for private ownership or commercial purposes.

Though the Supreme Court and the High Court of India did not specifically refer to the Doctrine
of Public Trust directly, in many cases they have given effect to this doctrine implicitly. Though
traditionally the Doctrine of Public Trust was applied only for protection of access to the common for
public benefit, now the Doctrine is being applied even to prevent over exploitation of the environment.
Now this doctrine is being used as a legal and planning tool for the fulfillment of sovereign’s role as
trustee o environment for future generations.

Professor Joseph L. Sax, Professor of Law, University of Michigan, who is also a proponent of the
modern public trust doctrine, imposes three restrictions on governmental authorities as noted by the
Supreme Court. These are:
• The property subject to the trust must not only be used for a public purpose, but it must be
held available for use by the general public.
• The property may not be sold, even for a fair cash equivalent.
• The property must be maintained for particular types of uses.

It was noted that American Courts have also accepted the public trust doctrine and applied it in
their case law and, the Supreme Court observed, it has now become a part of our environmental
jurisprudence also.

In M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. V. Radhey Shyam Sahu, Lucknow nagar Mahapalika permitted M.I.
Builders Pvt. Ltd. (the appellant herein) to construct an underground shopping complex beneath the
Jhandewala Park. The major part of the work was completed. The High Court quashed the relevant
resolutions that permitted the construction. When it set aside the agreement, the High Court had
noticed certain facts. The park was of historical importance, which the Mahapalika did not deny.
Preservation or maintenance of the park was necessary from the environment angle. The only reason
advanced by the Mahapalika for construction of the underground commercial complex was to ease the
congestion in the area. The High Court said that construction of the underground shopping complex
would only complicate the situation and the present scheme would further congest the area. The
builders appealed. The Supreme Court went on to say that Mahapalika is the trustee for the proper
management of the park. When true nature of the park, as it existed, is destroyed it would be violative
of the doctrine of public trust as expounded by this court, the court quotes that the idea of public
trusteeship rests upon three principles. Firstly, Certain interests like the air and the sea have such
importance to the citizenry that it would be unwise to make them the subject of private ownership.
Secondly, They should be made freely available to the entire citizenry without regard to economic
status. Thirdly, It is principle purpose of government to promote the general public rather than to
redistribute public goods from broad public use to restrict private benefit.

Sustainable Development
The concept of sustainable use of earth’s resource is an ancient one. Without the principles of
sustainability as a way of life, humans would not have survived in the 20th century. The principle of
sustainable development received impetus with the adoption of Stockholm Declaration in 1972, World
Conservation Strategy prepared in 1980 by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) with the advice and
assistance of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), World Charter for Nature of 1982,
Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development under the chairmanship of Geo
Harlem Brundtland (Brundtland Report), Our Common Future of 1987, the document Caring for the
Earth; A Strategy for the Sustainable Living developed by the second world conservation project
comprised of the representatives of the IUCN, UNEP and the Worldwide Fund for the Nature. The
concept of sustainable development is the foundation stone of the Montreal Protocol for the Protection
of Ozone Layer of 1987 and the instruments adopted at the UN Conference on Environment and
Development (World Summit) held at Rio in 1992.
Meaning and Definition
The Brundtland Report defines, ‘sustainable development’ as ‘development that meets the needs
of the present generation without compromising on the ability of the future generations to meet their
own needs.’ The report emphasizes that sustainable development means an integration of economics
and ecology in decision making at all levels.

The Caring for the Earth document defines ‘sustainability’ as ‘a characteristic or state that can be
maintained indefinitely’ whereas ‘development’ is defined as ‘the increasing capacity to meet human
needs and to improve the quality of human life.’ This means that sustainable development would imply
improving the quality of human life within the carrying capacity of the supporting ecosystems.

The concept of sustainable development rejects the old notion that development and
environment are antithesis of each other. On the contrary, it emphasizes that development and
environment are synthesis of each other. Both are complimentary and mutually supportive.

Sustainable Development is a process in which development can be sustained for generations. It

means improving the quality of human life while at the same time living in harmony with nature and
maintaining the carrying capacity of the life supporting ecosystem. Development means increasing the
society’s ability to meet human needs. Economic growth is an important component but cannot be a
goal in itself. The real aim must be to improve the quality of human existence to ensure people to enjoy
long, healthy and fulfilling lives.

Sustainable development focuses at integration of development and environmental imperatives.

It modifies the previously unqualified development concept. To be sustainable, development must
possess both economic and ecological sustainability. The concept of sustainable development indicates
the way in which development planning should be approached.

For being sustainable development must be both economic and environmentally viable. The
necessary condition for achieving sustainable development is ecological security, economic efficiency
and social equity. Sustainable development is, in fact, a multi-dimensional concept involving three
interacting aspects–ecology, economy and ethics. Ecological restoration, economic betterment and
social justice mutually reinforce one another. In practice environment protection is the development
because environment degradation leads to poverty and distorted development. Sustainable
development is the only path for conserving and promoting the socio-economic well-being of people.

How Judiciary Interpreted Sustainable Development?

Indian judiciary has demonstrated exemplary activism to implement the mandate of sustainable
development. In the past, Indian courts did not refer expressly to sustainable development but
implicitly gave effect to it. The Supreme Court has recognized the principle of sustainable development
as a basis for balancing ecological imperatives with developmental goals. In Rural Litigation and
Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of U.P., the Supreme Court was faced with the problem of the
mining activities in the limestone quarries in Dehradun-Mussoorie area. This was the first case of its
kind in the country involving issues relating to environment and ecological balance and brought into
sharp focus the conflict between development and conservation. In this case, the Supreme Court
emphasized the need for reconciling development and conservation in the larger interest of the
country.

In Kinkri Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh, the Himachal Pradesh High Court observed that if
industrial growth sought to be achieved by reckless mining resulting in loss of life, loss of property, loss
of amenities like water supply and creating of ecological imbalance then there may ultimately be no real
economic growth and no real development.

In People united for Better Living in Calcutta v. State of West Bengal, the Calcutta High Court
observed that it is true that in a developing country there shall have to be developments, but that
developments must be in harmony with the environment. There has to be a proper balance between the
economic growth and environment. So that both can exist without affecting each other.

The Supreme Court in Indian Council for Enviro-legal Actions v. Union of India, recognized
polluter pays principle as an integral feature of sustainable development and observed that the remedy
and betterment of damaged society is part of the process of sustainable development.

In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India recognized the
Principle of sustainable development as a basis for balancing ecological imperatives with
developmental goods. Rejecting the old notion that development and environment cannot go together,
the Supreme Court gave a landmark judgment and held that sustainable development is a viable
concept to eradicate poverty. It will improve the quality of human life if human beings live within the
carrying capacity of the life supporting ecosystem.

The Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, observed that “the development and the
protection of environments are not enemies. If without degrading the environment or minimizing
adverse effects thereupon by applying stringent safeguards, it is possible to carry on development
activity applying the principles of sustainable development, in that eventuality, the development has to
go on because one cannot lose sight of the need for development of industries, projects, etc. including
the need to improve employment opportunities and the generation of revenue. A balance has to be
struck.

In Fertilizers and Chemicals Praveucore limited. employees association v. Law society of India,
the court held that where public sector undertakings manufacture chemicals and fertilizers for the
larger benefit of the community asking them to relocate as they cause a threat to the life of the people in
neighbourhood areas, would not be a practical solution. Therefore court recommended that such
industries should continue their production subject to taking effective measures to protect and prevent
the risk of environmental accident.

Precautionary Principle
‘Precautionary principle’ plays a significant role in determining whether developmental process
is sustainable or not. ‘Precautionary principle’ underlies sustainable development which requires that
the developmental activity must be stopped and prevented if it causes serious and irreversible
environmental damage. The emergence of precautionary principle marks a shift in the international
environmental jurisprudence- a shift from assimilative capacity principle to precautionary principle.

1. Assimilative Capacity Principle: Assimilative capacity principle underlies earlier legal

measures to protect the environment. In 1972, the UN conference on Human Environment was held at
Stockholm which resulted in the adoption of Stockholm Declaration containing 26 principles. Principles
6 of the Stockholm Declaration contains assimilative capacity principle which assumes that science
could provide the policy makers with the necessary information and means to avoid encroaching upon
the capacity of the environment to assimilate impacts and it presumes that relevant technical expertise
would be available when environmental harm is predicted and there would be sufficient time to act in
order to avoid such harm. The assimilative capacity is based on the belief that scientific theories are
certain and adequate to provide the remedies for ecological restoration whenever pollution occurs. The
principle is built on the foundation of scientific certainties and adequacies. Assimilative capacity
principle suffers setback due to inadequacies and uncertainties of science visible in environment
context.

2. Assimilative Capacity to Precautionary Principle – A Shift – The uncertainty of scientific

proof and its changing frontiers from time to time have led to great changes in the environmental
concepts during the period between the Stockholm Conference of 1972 and the Rio Conference of 1992.
A basic shift to the approach to environmental protection occurred initially between 1972 and 1982.
Earlier the concept was based on the assimilative capacity rule as revealed from principle 6 of the
Stockholm Declaration. The emphasis shifted to ‘precautionary principle’ in the principle 11 of the
World Charter for Nature adopted on 28 October 1982 by the UN General Assembly by a majority of
111 votes with 18 abstentions and one negative vote casted by the United States. The developing
countries overwhelmingly endorsed the Charter. The former pre-1989 Soviet Block found the Charter,
an inexpensive and convenient way to demonstrate the fraternity with the isolation of United States in
the Green Assembly. The World Charter for Nature proclaims that activities which are likely to cause
irreversible damage to the nature shall be avoided.

So, precautionary principle is a principle which ensures that a substance or activity posing a
threat to the environment is prevented from adversely affecting it, even if there is no conclusive
scientific proof lining that particular substance or activity to the environmental damage. The words
‘substance’ and ‘activity’ imply substance or activity introduced as a result of human intervention.

In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (Tamil Nadu Tanneries Case), about 900
tanneries in five districts of the State of Tamil Nadu were discharging enormous amount of untreated
effluent consisting of about 170 different types of chemicals into agricultural fields, roadside,
waterways and open land. About 35,000 hectares of land became partially or totally unfit for
cultivation. The water in the area became unfit for consumption and irrigation purposes. In his
judgment, Justice Kuldip Singh (known to be a Green Judge) observed that, “even otherwise once these
principles are accepted as part of the Customary International Law, there would be no difficulty in
accepting them as part of the domestic law. It is almost accepted proposition of municipal law, that the
rule of customary international law, which are not contrary to the municipal law shall be deemed to
have been incorporated in the domestic law and shall also be followed by the Courts of laws of the
country.” One of the significant directions given by the Supreme Court in this litigation was contained in
an order passed in 1995 whereby some of the industries were required to set up effluent treatment
plants. In another order passed in 1996, the Supreme Court issued notices to some of the tanneries to
show cause why they should not be asked to pay pollution fine. The Supreme Court also recognized the
Precautionary Principle, which is one of the principles of sustainable development. It was said that in
the context of municipal law, the Precautionary Principle means : -
(1) Environmental measures – To anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of
environmental degradation.
(2) Lack of scientific enquiry should not be used to postpone measures for prevention of
environmental degradation.
(3) The onus of proof is on the actor, developer or industrialist to show that his action is
environmentally benign.

The Stockholm Declaration accepted the “assimilative capacity” rule which assumed that the
environment could assimilate impacts and science could provide the necessary information and
technology to deal with environmental degradation. The World Charter for Nature shifted the emphasis,
which came to be known and accepted in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992
as the Precautionary Principle. This principle is based on the ‘lack of full scientific certainty’. The basic
idea behind this principle is that it is better “to err on the side of caution and prevent activities that may
cause serious or irreversible harm. An informed decision can be made at a later stage when additional
data is available or resources permit further research.”Significantly, the Supreme Court recognized that
environmental concerns are as important as human rights concerns. It was said, “In fact, both are to be
traced to Article 21 which deals with the fundamental right to life and liberty. While environmental
aspects concern “life”, human rights aspects concern “liberty”. In our view, in the context of emerging
jurisprudence relating to environmental matters, - as is the case in matters relating to human rights, - it
is the duty of this Court to render justice by taking all aspects into consideration.” In view of certain
technical matters involved in this case, the Supreme Court resorted to the provisions of the National
Environmental Appellate Authority Act, 1997 and referred two questions for its opinion. After obtaining
the report of the Appellate Authority and considering it along with two other reports, the Supreme
Court applied the Precautionary Principle and passed appropriate orders.

In Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, precautionary principle came to be considered

by the majority of judges. The Court also took the view that the doctrine is to be employed only in cases
of pollution when its impact is uncertain and non-negligible.
 In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, the Supreme Court once again followed the path of sustainable
development and directed that the industries operating in Taj Trapezium Zone using a coke/coal as
industrial fuel must stop functioning and they could relocate to the alternate site provided under the
Agra Master Plan. It further stated that not even 1% chance could be taken when human life a part, the
preservation of a prestigious monument like the Taj was involved.

The Precautionary Principle led to the evolution of the special principle of burden of proof
mentioned in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum. As per this special principle, the burden is on the person
wanting to change the status quo to show that the actions proposed will not have an injurious effect, the
presumption operating in favor of environmental protection. This concept of ‘reverse onus’ requires
that the burden of proof for safety rests on the proponent of a technology and not on the general public
– a new technology should be considered dangerous unless proved otherwise.

The Precautionary Principle is relatable to risk assessment and environmental impact

assessment. Broadly, it postulates that decisions that may have an impact on the environment need to
allow for and recognize conditions of uncertainty, particularly with respect to the possible
environmental consequences of those decisions. Under the circumstances, it is essential to take
preventive action or avoid effects, which may be damaging even if this cannot be proven.

3.3 Legal remedies for environmental problems: Environmental Disputes and its Redressal
agencies: Environmental Tribunals, Public liability Insurance and Environment Relief Fund and
remedies under other laws;

Public Liability Insurance

The growth of the hazardous industries, processes and operations in India has been
accompanied by the growing risks of accidents, not only to the workmen employed in such
undertakings, but also to the innocent members of the public who may be in the vicinity. Such accidents
lead to death and injury to human beings and other living beings and damage private and public
properties. Very often, the majority of the people affected is from economically weaker sections and
suffer great hardships because of delayed relief and compensation. While workers and employees of
hazardous installations are protected under separate laws, members of the public are not assured of
any relief except through long legal processes. Industrial units seldom have the willingness to readily
compensate the victims of accidents. It is, therefore, essential to provide for mandatory public liability
for installations and handling of hazardous substances to provide minimum relief to the victims. Such
insurance, apart from safeguarding the interests of the victims of accidents, would also provide cover
and enable the industry to discharge its liability to settle large claims arising out of major accidents. If
the objectives of providing minimum relief are to be achieved, the mandatory public liability insurance
should be based on the principle of ‘no-fault’ liability (absolute liability) as it is limited to grant of relief
on a limited scale. However, the availability of immediate relief should not prevent the victims to go to
courts for claiming larger compensation.

The Public Liability Insurance Act 1991, has been enacted with the object of providing
immediate relief to the victims of accidents that might occur while handling of hazardous substances.
The owner who has control over handling of hazardous substances is required under the Act to pay
specified amounts to the victims as interim relief based on ‘no-fault’ liability. The Act stipulates the
maximum compensation for injury or death at Rs. 25,000 and limits compensation in respect of damage
to private property to Rs. 6000. The right of a victim to claim additional relief under any other law is
expressly reserved. The Act makes it mandatory for every owner handling hazardous substances to take
out insurance policies covering potential liability from an accident. An ‘accident’ is defined to cover a
sudden unintended occurrence while ‘handling’ any hazardous substance resulting in continuous,
intermittent or repeated exposure leading to death or injury to any person, or damage to property or
the environment. Accidents by reason of war or radio-activity are excluded from the scope of the Act.

The expression ‘handling’ is defined widely to include manufacture, trade and transport of
hazardous substances. However, the Act could not be implemented on account of the insurance
companies not agreeing to give insurance policies for unlimited liability of the owners. It was, therefore,
felt that the liability of the insurance companies should be limited to the amount of insurance policy
though the owner’s liability should continue to be unlimited under the Act. It was also considered
appropriate to create an Environmental Relief Fund established by the Central Government with the
additional money collected from the owners having control over handling of hazardous substances. This
fund was also required to be used to meet the requirement of providing immediate relief to the victims.
The principal administrative authority under the Act is the collector, who is required to verify the
occurrence of an industrial accident, give publicity to the event and invite applications for
compensation and award relief. The minimum and maximum limits of the insurance amount in an
insurance policy also needed to be specified for ensuring payment of adequate relief. Accordingly, the
Public Liability Insurance (Amendment) Ordinance 1992, was promulgated by the President on 31
January 1992, as the owners handling hazardous substances had to take insurance policies by 1 March
1992. The Ordinance was replaced by the Public Insurance (Amendment) Bill 1992, which after being
passed by both the Houses of Parliament received the assent of the President on 1 March 1992, and
became the Public Liability Insurance (Amendment) Act 1992.
UNIT 4: Laws and Waste Management:
4.1 Concept, meaning, cause, disposal, control and the laws:
4.2 Municipal Solid Waste; Plastic Wastes; Hospital Wastes; Electronic Wastes; Radioactive
Waste.

Waste management laws govern the transport, treatment, storage, and disposal of all manner
of waste, including municipal solid waste, hazardous waste, and nuclear waste, among many other
types. Waste laws are generally designed to minimize or eliminate the uncontrolled dispersal of waste
materials into the environment in a manner that may cause ecological or biological harm, and include
laws designed to reduce the generation of waste and promote or mandate waste recycling. Regulatory
efforts include identifying and categorizing waste types and mandating transport, treatment, storage,
and disposal practices.

UNIT 5: Protection of Forest and Wild Life:

5.1 Need and importance of forest, Deforestation causes and effects-The Indian Forest Act, 1927
Forest Conservation Act, 1980;

Why is Forests Important?

Forests are our land’s trees and plants that cover a third of the earth’s surface symbolized by the
colour green in the common definition of environmentalism. There are many reasons why forests are
an important feature for the environment and in our daily lives. They are fundamental life forms and
provide for the continuity of the world’s biodiversity which is necessary for economic development,
diversity of life forms, human livelihood, and environmental adaptive responses.
Forests are mainly important because they stabilize climate, regulate the water cycle, and
provides habitat to thousands of life forms. Below are the leading reasons signifying the importance of
forest.
Forests cover nearly a third of all land on Earth, providing vital organic infrastructure for some
of the planet's densest, most diverse collections of life. They support countless species, including our
own, yet we often seem oblivious of that. Humans now clear millions of acres from natural forests every
year, especially in the tropics, letting deforestation threaten some of Earth's most valuable ecosystems.
We tend to take forests for granted, underestimating how indispensable they still are for
everyone on the planet. That would quickly change if they all disappeared, but since humanity might
not survive that scenario, the lesson wouldn't be very useful by then.
Indifference, in turn, often depends on ignorance. So to help things get better for woodlands
around the world, we'd all be wise to learn more about the benefits of forests — and to share that
knowledge with others. That's the goal of events like the International Day of Forests, a U.N. holiday
observed annually on March 21. But forests support us every day of the year, and as deforestation runs
rampant around the world, they increasingly need us to return the favour.

Below are 9 reasons why forests are important and why should we protect forests from getting axed.
1. Supports Ecosystems and Habitats
Forests are habitats to millions of animals and support numerous ecosystems. About 90%
of all earth’s species live in forests. Animals such as lizards, snakes, turtles, crocodiles, alligators,
insects, birds, butterflies and monkeys among other wild animals such as lions and leopards all live in
the forests or within the rivers and streams in forest areas.
Therefore, these animals form their food chains in the forests by interacting with each
other in their respective physical environments which creates an ecosystem. Healthy ecosystems are
critical for the flourishing of the animal lives. Additionally, millions of indigenous people still live in the
forests and depend on them for survival.

2. Protects Watershed Areas

Forests act as watershed regions since, approximately all the water merely comes from
forest-derived water tables and from within the rivers, lakes, and streams in forest areas. Streams and
rivers running through forests are protected from sun’s radiation and drying by the forest cover.
The Amazon, for instance, provides one of the largest watershed and river systems in the world. Many
other forest areas around the globe also serve as significant watershed areas.

3. Supports Biodiversity
Forests serve as reserves for the genes of biodiversity. This is because forests carry about
90% of all the earth’s species, both plants and animals, thereby making up a diversity of plant and
animal life forms in the various forest habitats. Forests also support biodiversity by offering enabling
environments where different plants and animals can easily thrive. Forests also support the life of some
of the world’s endangered species.

4. Purifies the Air

Forests play an important role in the purification of the atmospheric air. During the day,
trees and plants absorb carbon dioxide for photosynthesis and give out oxygen. As such, they help in the
purification of the air that we breathe. Forests thus serve as an instrumental tool for reducing the
amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses in the environment which are responsible for
global warming.

5. Stabilize Climate
Forests serve as climate stabilizers since trees and plants regulate atmospheric
temperatures through evaporation and proving environmental breeze. In urban settings, for instance,
the presence of trees can reduce the dependence of air conditioners. Large forests regulate regional
temperatures by absorbing the sun’s radiant heat and promote rainfall as well as cool climate as an
effect of evaporation

6. Enrich the Soil

Plants and trees help to recycle the soil nutrients through the shedding of leaves and
small branches. The plant and tree roots also break the soils in finer particles and encourage water
infiltration into the soil. The roots also absorb some water from surface runoff and reduce the speed of
flow, minimizing soil erosion which normally degrades the fertility of the soil.

7. Regulates the Water Cycle

Forests also regulate the natural cycle of water evaporation and subsequent condensation
and precipitation as rain. Forests make this possible by absorbing and redistributing rainwater pretty
equally across the entire geographical coverage, which is mostly termed as water economy. Forests also
absorb considerable amounts of water from runoff and pass it down into the aquifers, replenishing
groundwater supplies.

8. Medicinal Value
Forests are highly linked to medicinal research and pharmaceutical breakthroughs due to
their extensive plant life and animal life forms. A large percentage of the drugs used for diverse medical
treatments are extracted from the plants and animals that live in the forests. Forests are comprised of
numerous and incredible cures including the drugs used to relieve the effects of cancers.

9. Economic Significance
Forests are of vast economic benefits to us. For instance, plantation forests provide
humans with wood and timber, which is used in construction and as raw materials for numerous
products. Also, whenever tourists visit the forest areas to view the beautiful sceneries alongside the
wildlife forms inhabiting the forests, the hosting nations and communities get revenue from tourism.
Forests are also a source to rare animals like wild rabbits, and foods or vegetables such as berries,
tubers, and edible mushrooms that grow on the forest floors.

What is Deforestation?
Deforestation can be defined as the large-scale removal of trees from forests (or other lands) for
the facilitation of human activities. It is a serious environmental concern since it can result in the loss of
biodiversity, damage to natural habitats, disturbances in the water cycle, and soil erosion. Deforestation
is also a contributor to climate change and global warming.
Deforestation is the clearing, destroying, or otherwise removal of trees through deliberate,
natural or accidental means. It can occur in any area densely populated by trees and other plant life,
but the majority of it is currently happening in the Amazon rainforest.
The loss of trees and other vegetation can cause climate change, desertification, soil erosion,
fewer crops, flooding, increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and a host of problems for
indigenous people.
Deforestation occurs for a number of reasons, including: farming, mostly cattle due to its quick turn
around; and logging, for materials and development. It has been happening for thousands of years,
arguably since man began converting from hunter/gatherer to agricultural based societies, and
required larger, unobstructed tracks of land to accommodate cattle, crops, and housing. It was
only after the onset of the modern era that it became an epidemic.

Causes of Deforestation
1. Agricultural Activities: As earlier mentioned in the overview, agricultural activities are one
of the major factors affecting deforestation. Due to overgrowing demand for food products, huge
amount of tress are fell down to grow crops and for cattle grazing.
 2. Logging: Apart from this, wood based industries like paper, match-sticks, furniture etc also
need a substantial amount of wood supply. Wood is used as fuel both directly and indirectly, therefore
trees are chopped for supplies. Firewood and charcoal are examples of wood being used as fuel. Some of
these industries thrive on illegal wood cutting and felling of trees.
3. Urbanization: Further on order to gain access to these forests, the construction of roads are
undertaken; here again trees are chopped to create roads. Overpopulation too directly affects forest
covers, as with the expansion of cities more land is needed to establish housing and settlements.
Therefore forest land is reclaimed.
4. Desertification of land: Some of the other factors that lead to deforestation are also part
natural and part anthropogenic like Desertification of land. It occurs due to land abuse making it unfit
for growth of trees. Many industries in petrochemicals release their waste into rivers which results in
soil erosion and make it unfit to grow plants and trees.
5. Mining: Oil and coal mining require considerable amount of forest land. Apart from this, roads
and highways have to be built to make way for trucks and other equipment. The waste that comes out
from mining pollutes the environment and affects the nearby species.
6. Forest Fires: Another example would be forest blazes; Hundreds of trees are lost each year
due to forest fires in various portions of the world. This happens due to extreme warm summers and
milder winters. Fires, whether causes by man or nature results in huge loss of forest cover.

Environmental Effects of Deforestation From Above

 Loss of Habitat
One of the most dangerous and unsettling effects of deforestation is the loss of animal and
plant species due to their loss of habitat; not only do we lose those known to us, but also those
unknown, potentially an even greater loss.
“Seventy percent of Earth’s land animals and plants live in forests, and many cannot
survive the deforestation that destroys their homes.”
The trees of the rainforest that provide shelter for some species also provide the canopy
that regulates the temperature, a necessity for many others. Its removal through deforestation would
allow a more drastic temperature variation from day to night, much like a desert, which could prove
fatal for current inhabitants.

 Increased Greenhouse Gases

In addition to the loss of habitat, the lack of trees also allows a greater amount of
greenhouse gases to be released into the atmosphere. Presently, the tropical rainforests of South
America are responsible for 20% of Earth’s oxygen and they are disappearing at a rate of 4 hectares a
decade. If these rates are not stopped and reversed, the consequences will become even more severe.

 Water in the Atmosphere

The trees also help control the level of water in the atmosphere by helping to regulate
the water cycle. With fewer trees left, due to deforestation, there is less water in the air to be returned
to the soil. In turn, this causes dryer soil and the inability to grow crops, an ironic twist when
considered against the fact that 80% of deforestation comes from small-scale agriculture and cattle
ranching.

Environmental Effects of Deforestation From Below

 Soil Erosion and Flooding
Further effects of deforestation include soil erosion and coastal flooding. In addition to
their previously mentioned roles, trees also function to retain water and topsoil, which provides the
rich nutrients to sustain additional forest life.
Without them, the soil erodes and washes away, causing farmers to move on
and perpetuate the cycle. The barren land which is left behind in the wake of these unsustainable
agricultural practices is then more susceptible to flooding, specifically in coastal regions.
“Coastal vegetation lessens the impact of waves and winds associated with a storm surge.
Without this vegetation, coastal villages are susceptible to damaging floods.”
Effects of Deforestation on Indigenous People
 Destruction of Homelands
As large amounts of forests are cleared away, allowing exposed earth to whither and die
and the habitats of innumerable species to be destroyed, the indigenous tribes who depend on them to
sustain their way of life are also irreparably damaged.
The loss of forests has an immediate and direct effect on their lifestyle that we in the
modern world, despite our own dependency on what the rainforest provides, will never know. The level
of immediacy is exponentially greater.
The governments of nations with rainforests in their borders also attempt to evict
indigenous tribes, and often succeed, before the actual clear-cutting begins. One of the pre-emptive
effects of deforestation.

5.2 National Forest Policies. Wild Life Protection in India- ancient, British period and
Independent India; Wild Life Protection Act, 1972