Environmental Law Assignment

Submitted in part fulfillment for the requirements of the Degree of

LLB
Submitted by Submitted to

Ashita Sahay Ms. Smita Tyagi

A3256118099 Assistant Professor
Section B ALS

Amity Law School,Noida

Amity University,
2020
 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India

Delhi Ridge Case

Equivalent Citations: AIR 2004 SC 4016

Petitioner: M.C. Mehta
Vs.
Respondent: Union of India & ors.
Bench: Y.K. Sabharwal & H.K. Sema.
Date of judgment: 18/03/2004

Background 
The issue in this case was whether the mining activity in area up to 5 kms from the Delhi-
Haryana border on the Haryana side of the ridge and also in the Aravalli hills causes
environmental degradation and what directions are required to be issued.

The Delhi Ridge is often referred to as the green lung of India’s capital city. A series of low
hills extending in two branches to cradle the city, the Ridge also contains the city’s densest
forest cover. It serves many valuable ecological functions, protecting Delhi from the dust of
nearby Rajasthan, lowering the ambient temperature, cleaning the air, sheltering flora and
fauna, and – perhaps most importantly – filtering and preserving groundwater in a parched
city. An ever-growing capital city (the 2011 census puts the population at 16.6 million), Delhi
faces significant pressure on its green spaces. In the 1980s and 1990s, various citizens’
groups, NGOs and activists banded together to save the Ridge’s forests from encroachment
and widespread destruction. This movement won significant victories, but the Ridge has now
receded from the public consciousness. This article is an attempt to re-examine a movement
that has largely faded into the background, despite the continued importance of preserving the
Ridge. After briefly reviewing the long history of the Ridge, the article will analyze the “Save
the Ridge” movement, its triumphs and its current marginalization in the public conversation
about Delhi.
Historical Overview

The Delhi Ridge is the tail end of the Aravalli mountain range, which arose over a billion
years ago. The Himalayas, by contrast, are quite young (about 50 million years old). The
Aravallis have been worn down by time, and now, at their grandest, reach a height of only
1700 meters. In Delhi, the Ridge is comprised of several hilly spurs. The Ridge has played an
important role in Delhi’s history, and even its prehistory. The rocky outcrops of the Ridge
contain high-quality quartzite, which Stone Age tribes used to make tools. In fact,
archeologists have discovered Stone Age factories along the Delhi ridge, evidence of the
widespread production of tools. Stone Age tribes were also drawn to the dense forest cover of
the ridge, which provided food (both plant and animal) and shelter. Further, there was
plentiful water, a point still relevant today.

The Ridge has been critical in more recent Delhi history as well. According to traditional
accounts, Delhi has seen seven cities rise and fall (the seventh being the Mughal city of
Shajahanabad, now known as “Old Delhi,” which fell to the British). The first four of these
cities – during medieval times – chose to locate themselves directly on the Ridge, partly for
ecological reasons and partly because of the military vantage point afforded by the hills.
However, by the late Mughal period, the city had shifted towards the banks of the Yamuna
River and the Ridge had been largely deforested, even though it still served an important role
as a groundwater source and a grazing site for local pastoralists.

The Ridge became especially significant in British times, for a variety of reasons. First was
the watershed year of 1857, which witnessed a widespread uprising against British rule
(known in India as the First War of Independence and in Britain as simply the Mutiny).
Although the uprising occurred across northern India, fighting was especially intense in
Delhi, as the rebels rallied around the Mughal “emperor” (who had been reduced to the
ceremonial role of “King of Delhi” under close British watch). The British troops stationed
themselves on the northern portion of the Delhi Ridge (again, seeking the military advantage
of its height), and after the rebellion – which the British brutally crushed – the Ridge took on
the status of sacred monument.

When the British shifted their imperial capital from Calcutta (now Kolkata) to Delhi – a
decision announced in 1911 – the Ridge again became a focus of attention. The British
wanted their new capital to show the majestic grandeur and order of the empire, especially
given India’s status as the “jewel in the crown” of British power. Much of the planning of the
new city revolved around designs for impressive buildings, and wide, well-ordered roads;
these are the elements of New Delhi that still get attention today. However, the Ridge also
played an important, if underappreciated, role. The British envisioned the Ridge as an
appropriately majestic backdrop to the new city. They undertook an ambitious reforestation
program on the section of the Ridge near New Delhi. Since they were largely focused on
aesthetic concerns, rather than ecological ones, they introduced many exotic species that they
thought would provide suitable ornamentation. Unsurprisingly, most of these foreign species
did not survive Delhi’s harsh, dry climate, with one notable exception: the Prosopis juliflora,
a Mexican mesquite tree now known in India as vilayati (foreign) kikar. The vilayati
kikar thrived in Delhi, and indeed established extensive monocultures in the Ridge. While
this greatly increased Delhi’s green cover, it was not an entirely positive development. The
mesquite is successful because it crowds out its competition, sending down long roots to suck
up precious groundwater and drying up surface soiling. It thus pushes down water tables and
does not allow other plants to grow.

The British afforestation of the Delhi Ridge also shows the exclusivity and colonial nature of
British forestry. People living in villages near the Ridge were displaced, and locals who
depended on the Ridge for fuel and fodder were kept out by fences and guards. In 1913, the
Central Ridge (near New Delhi) was named a Reserved Forest, thus placing it under more
stringent British control. The British employed a model of imperial forestry that still has
some echoes in modern environmental policy.

The “Save the Ridge” Campaign

The contemporary movement to preserve the Ridge as forest land began in 1979, with the
founding of the student group Kalpavriksh (named after the wish-granting tree of Sanskrit
myth, now associated with the Banyan tree). These students protested the felling of trees in
the Ridge to make way for various developments. In 1980, the Lieutenant Governor
(administrative head) of Delhi declared portions of the Ridge as protected forests.
Throughout the 1980s, groups like Kalpavriksh fought for increased protection of the Ridge.
But the movement only came to a head in 1992, when large portions of the Ridge were
transferred to the oversight of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The DDA is the
governmental organization in charge of implementing Delhi’s Master Plan for urban
development and regulation. Even though portions of the Ridge were protected, their transfer
to the DDA raised fears that the agency would want to “develop” the land – with residential
flats, shopping complexes, government buildings and so on. Further, the DDA’s vision of a
“green Delhi” was far different from that of Ridge activists. The DDA envisioned
meticulously manicured parks, free of undergrowth and largely free of tree cover, to be filled
with jogging tracks and benches. Indeed, they had already built such parks in several areas of
the Ridge, drastically reducing the variety and density of flora and fauna in these areas. Ridge
advocates, on the other hand, maintained a vision of a relatively wild forest, which would
retain its ecological role as an air purifier, cooler and wildlife habitat.

In 1992, Kalpavriksh joined with several other organizations to form the Joint NGO Forum to
Save the Ridge, which included major groups like the WWF (World Wildlife Fund). The
Forum helped mobilize school and neighborhood organizations, and publicized the cause in
various media outlets. There was a strong response from citizens who valued the Ridge, and
several marches and protests were held. In April 1993, responding to the public pressure, the
government appointed a 10-person committee to develop recommendations for managing the
Ridge. The committee advised that the four major sections of the Delhi Ridge all be notified
as Reserved Forests, the highest level of protection the government can provide. It also
recommended that a special board be constituted to oversee the management of the Ridge.
Both of these recommendations were accepted by the government, and, in 1994, about 78
square kilometers of the Ridge were notified as Reserved Forest. This was a major victory for
the “Save the Ridge” movement, and indeed marked the high point of the Ridge campaign.

The Aftermath of the 1994 Notification

the Vasant Kunj Ridge provides a clear case of environmental activists seeking to protect a
threatened ecosystem from rapacious developers, conflicts in other parts of the Ridge proved
to be more ambiguous, with the environmentalists less clearly the “good guys.” The 1994
notification was used by the government as justification for removing poor, “unsightly”
encroachments while letting wealthy encroachments remain. This is in keeping with the
British view of the Ridge as an elite aesthetic backdrop, to be used for the benefit of the
haves, to the exclusion of the have-nots. So while luxurious “farmhouses” remained on the
Ridge, protected by their wealthy, well-connected owners, shanty-towns and slums were
destroyed.
A particularly controversial case was that of the Bhatti Mines in the southern part of the
Ridge. The mines themselves had long been shut down, after evidence emerged of
widespread labor abuse. The area had ostensibly been converted into a wildlife sanctuary, but
government afforestation efforts did little to change the barren landscape, and the erstwhile
miners still remained in settlements in the area. Of particular note was the Od community,
part of a traditionally nomadic tribe that had settled in the Delhi area after Indian
Independence in 1947. The Ods are traditional diggers and earth masons, and they have
significant knowledge about building ponds, canals and other water bodies. Despite this
wealth of traditional knowledge, their villages in the Bhatti Mines area were declared mere
slums after 1994 in order to expedite their destruction. The villagers protested this move, but
to no effect. Most of the villages in the Bhatti Mines area were razed; one remained due to its
fierce protests, as well as its political connections.

The Bhatti Mines case reveals that the Ridge movement was not immune to aesthetic and
social concerns that echoed British elitism; perhaps this is why the movement has not
retained a broad based of support. However, it should be stressed that many Ridge advocates
were appalled at the action of the government. Groups like Kalpavriksh have long recognized
the importance of the Ridge as a source of fuel and fodder for poor communities, and
activists like Ravi Agarwal (a key member of the Save the Ridge campaign) have advocated
on behalf of the Od.

For the moment, there are no major conflicts occurring on Ridge land, and – as a result – the
spirit of Ridge activism has largely died down. However, as Delhi continues to expand,
pressures on the Ridge will increase. The challenge for Ridge activists is to stress the genuine
ecological importance of the Ridge without resorting to the authoritarian, exclusionary
measures championed by the Delhi government.

Issue Raised 

1. Whether the mining activity in area up to 5 kilometers from the Delhi-Haryana

border on the Haryana side of the ridge and Aravalli hills causes environment
degradation?
2. Whether the mining activity deserves to be absolutely banned or permitted on
compliance of stringent conditions and by monitoring it to prevent the
environmental pollution?
Submissions and proceedings 

Haryana Pollution Control Board (HPCB) reported that explosives are being used for rock
blasting for the purpose of mining. Mining operations were resulting in soil erosion and
causing an ecological disaster. It was recommended by the HPCB that an Environmental
Management Plan (EMP) should be prepared by mine lease holders for their mines and mines
should be made operative only after the approval of HPCB. The report recommended a
complete stoppage of mining activities within a radius of 5 kms from Badkal Lake and
Surajkund (a tourist place) in Haryana. The Haryana Government thereafter stopped all
mining operations on the basis of this report.

The mine operators raised objections to the recommendations of stoppage of mining

operations. According to them, the pollution that was generated by the mining activities
cannot go beyond a distance of 1 km and the stoppage was unjustified.

NEERI also submitted it report which recommended a complete closure of mining operation
in the concerned area.

On the basis of the reports submitted by NEERI and HPCB, the Supreme Court came to the
conclusion that the mining activities in the vicinity of tourist resorts are bound to cast serious
impact on the local ecology and environment. The mining brings extensive alteration in the
natural land profile of the area.The ambient air in the mining area gets highly polluted by the
dust generated by the blasting operations, vehicular movement, loading, unloading,
transportation and the exhaust gases from equipment and machinery used in the mining
operations.

In order to preserve environment and control pollution within the vicinity of two tourist
resorts, it was necessary to stop mining activity within 2 kilometer radius of the tourist resorts
of Badkal Lake and Surajkund. The Court further directed the Director of HPCB to enforce
all the recommendations of NEERI.The court stated that any failure to comply with the
recommendations may result in the closure of the mining operations and that the mining
leases within the area from 2 kms to 5 kms radius shall not be renewed without obtaining
prior No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the HPCB and the Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB). 

With respect to the second issue, the court directed the Environmental Pollution Central
Authority (EPCA)to submit a report with respect to the environment in the area after a
personal visit. The personal visit was to be made without any prior notice.

During the visit the EPCA found evidence of clear violation of some of the key conditions of
order of this court dated May 10, 1996.EPCA saw no evidence that this recommendation had
even been attempted to be followed.

On the basis of study and visit as well as the report of the Central Ground Water Board,
EPCA made the following recommendations –

1. Ban on the mining activities and pumping of ground water in and from an area up
to 5 kms. from the Delhi-Haryana border
2. All efforts must be made to ensure that the local economy is rejuvenated, with the
use of plantations and local water harvesting based opportunities.
3. The Central Ground Water Board must be consulted urgently about what should be
done with the huge standing water in the area.
4. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) should be asked to extend the
notification under the Environment (Protection) Actto the Faridabad part of the
Aravalli and ridge as well.
5. The mining area outside the 5 kms area must be demarcated and regulated. 
6. Constant monitoring of the area must be done by a Central Government
agency. The environment management plan (EMP) for the mining area as well as
the conditions of the NOC should be made a public document.

The mines inspected by EPCA were below 150 feet (45 meters) and on checking it was found
that most mines were further operating at 20-100 feet (6-30 meters) below water levels. This
meant that the mines were abstracting water from the confined aquifer which resulted in
lowering of ground water levels.
The NOC given by the Central Pollution Control Board includes an explicit condition
regarding ground water: “That the mine owner will ensure that there is no discharge of
effluent or ground water outside lease premises. They must take measures for rain water
harvesting and reuse of water so as not to affect the ground water table in the areas. Most
importantly, it stipulates that there should be no mining operations shall be carried out in the
water table area.”

EPCA was concerned that if mining is allowed to continue in this area, it will have serious
implications for the groundwater reserve which is the only source of drinking water in the
area.

The Court held that the mining operations are hazardous to the nature and relied on T.N.
Godavarman case[1] to note that a balance has to be struck between development and
environment protection.  The court also relied on Principle 15 of Rio Conference of 1992
relating to the applicability of precautionary principle which stipulates that where there are
threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a
reason for proposing effective measures to prevent environmental degradation is also
required to be kept in view.

Precautionary principle requires anticipatory action to be taken to prevent harm. The harm
can be prevented even on a reasonable suspicion. It is not always necessary that there should
be direct evidence of harm to the environment.

The Court relied on Section 18 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act
which talks about the commencement of mining activities. It was held that a mining lease
holder is not only required to comply with MMRD Act but other statutory provisions as well
such as Environment (protection) Act, 1986, Air (Prevention and control of Pollution) Act,
1981, The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Forest (Conservation) Act,
1980. Mere approval of the mining plan by Government of India, Ministry of Mines would
not absolve the lease holder from complying with the other provisions under other
environmental laws.

The court relied on Rules 31 to 41 in Chapter V of the Mineral Conservation and

Development Rules, 1988 framed under Section 18 of the MMRD Act whichdeals with the
measures required to be taken by the lessee for the protection of environment from any
adverse effect of mining or irreversible consequences thereof.

These rules state that that holder of the mining lease shall take all precautions for the
protection of the environment while conducting mining operations. The holder must keep the
waste rocks, rejects and fines generated during mining operations in separate dump to prevent
air pollution. Wherever possible, the waste rock and overburden shall be deposited back into
the mines excavation with a view to restoring the land for its original use as far as possible. If
it is not feasible during mining operation, the waste dumps shall be suitably made waste rock
should be deposited.Air pollution due to fines, dust and smoke or gaseous emissions during
mining operations and related activities should be controlled and kept within ‘permissible
limits’ specified under various environmental laws of the country including the Air
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
by the holder of mining lease.

The Court held that these rules should be strictly complied with for the protection of the
environment.

The Court relied on a report prepared by the Central Mine Planning & Design Institute
Limited (CMPDI).The Central Mine Planning & Design Institute Limited (CMPDI) on being
asked by the Central Pollution Control Board to conduct a study of environmental problems
of Aravalli hills. The CMPDI recommended that the State government should improve inter-
departmental coordination among various government departments to achieve a common goal
which is ecological restoration of area affected by these mining operations. There should be a
master plan which indicates the proposed eco- restoration plan to compensate the
environmental degradation.

There were no objection raised to the recommendations of CMPDI and these

recommendations were accepted by the Supreme Court in principle.

Final Order

1. The mining activity can be permitted only on the basis of sustainable development
and on compliance of stringent conditions.
2. The Aravalli hill range has to be protected at any cost. In case despite stringent
condition, there is an adverse irreversible effect on the ecology in the Aravalli hill
range area, at a later date, the total stoppage of mining activity in the area may
have to be considered. For similar reasons such step may have to be considered in
respect of mining in Faridabad District as well.
3. Violation of any of the conditions would entail the risk of cancellation of mining
lease. The mining activity shall continue only on strict compliance of the stipulated
conditions. The matters are directed to be listed after reopening of courts after
summer vacation on receipt of the report from the Monitoring Committee.