Environmental Law

-United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (RIO+20), 2012

To take up steps wrt goal of sustainable development

It was continuation of

-General principles of environmental law

Substantive law on environment- (Right to environment)

Forest act and all- doesn’t gove any right to environment, rather it comes from Art-21. Just a
mechanism to get your rights enforced.

Case- Subhash Kumar-

In 2010, after coming of Green Tribunal, we do have statutory recognition.

Though only in the preamble of the green tribunal Act. Therewise only Ar-21 is there.

Procedural law-

I should able to make the environmental body, etc, accountable.

1. 1st imp. Right is Right to access to justice-

Right to information-
Exception- public interest info
If you check pollution control website-

First, info is needed to know how the pollution is in the said place.

Writs, CrPC, CPC (nuisance) , National green tribunal act

2. Right to public participation and decision making-

……………………………

3 types of forests-

Reserved- You cant enter unless you have a pass

, protected- hunting and all cant take place

, and, village forest

………………..

Right of Environment-

No constitutional right regarding it as per now.

Will have to bring it through right of a person in Art- 14,19, 21.

Lalit Miglani V. St of Uttrakhand-

Mohd. Salim V. st of Uttrakhand-

They felt that personality be attributed/ personhood to river. Though not discussed fund. Right of
environment. Though the conseq. Has not changed much.

Right of environ. –

If trees are also giving personality, harming them would as good as harming a person – Christopher
Stone.

SIara club case- A ski resort has to built. It was challenged in court as it will create ecologiv=cal
imbalance, disturbed. No remedy granted as according to US Supreme Court, people (environntal
grp) have no locus standi.
Disenting opinion-

Persons who have rights but aint capable of representing their interest, in loco parentis. So, these
rivers should also be kept on same line i.e. enforcing rights through someone else/ on theie behalf.

Finally, now anybody can act as representative to those things in environmental which has een given
personality and can go to court.

Now, ques is would would have locus standi. We need to move t eco-centric approach.

DPSP –

Not actionable in the court.

IN 1950, there was no explicit mention of environmental protection, though Art-47’s extension was
there in the implicit form.

In 1976, to give it explicit mention, (coz 1972, Indian signed Stockholm declaration) Art-48A- (draft)
St. shall conserve and develop water, soil and other natural resources . This was very narrow
approach thus rejected this and came up with-

A.P high court- DPSP is only guidance but jud. Should use it as obligatory.

Fundamental duties-

At- 51A (g)- was dormant just like DPSP unless NGT came up.

Since everyone’s fund dutu corresponds to others’ right of clean envir.,

NGT Act came in 2010.

NGT- Because it’s everyone’s duty, one can go to NGT invoking fundamental duty. So, threshold of
locus standi was extended to literally everyone.

Distribution of legis. Powers-

Envir. act, water act, air act, forest act , wildlife prot. Act.

Sch-7-

List 2- water Act.

Q-Since none of entries give powers to govt to make any laws on these laws, how do these
laws/aacts get its power from?

……………………….

Art-249

Art-252-

Art-253- if you want to keep effect to int. law into domestic legal system.

So, now States can opt out of water act but can’t from the air Act.
Significance of 42nd consti. amend- 1976

Law and practice before NGT –

Coz specialsed bench is needed.

Time- we camt afford our environmental decision waitinv as env. Harm would cause irreversible
impact.

Fragmented remedy problem- each law gives me diff remedy.

Jurisdiction-

As per Act-2-

Original juris. - wrt 7 Acts given in NGT, wildlife Act not given as NGT is more civil remedy and
wildlife is more of a crim. Statute.

Appellate- jurisd.-

over all civil cases, including any legal rights

In practical sense--

3rd issue-moto jurisd.- Shouldn’t be restrained as it is doing good.

In Indian context, High court and S.C are allowed to take suo-moto, though that also comes by
extending S-141 ,141 only. So, the same way, despite it not explicitly mentioned, NGT should also be
allowed to.

4th is -Judicial review

Policy making

Why are tribunals there? For Speedy redressal

…………

(5000 words, 25% plagiarism)

……………

NGT in practice