CLIMATE CHANGE

Umamaheswari M
(ELO2019)

Pandey v. India (2017)

• Ridhima Pandey, a nine-year-old from the Uttarakhand region, is the named plaintiff
in a climate change case filed in March 2017 with the National Green Tribunal of
India. Plaintiff’s petition argues that the Public Trust Doctrine, India’s commitments
under the Paris Agreement, and India’s existing environmental laws and climate-
related policies oblige greater action to mitigate climate change.
• This case was brought pursuant to section 2(m) of the National Green Tribunal Act
2010, which authorizes claims that raise “a substantial question relating to the
environment.” In addition to those legal provisions, the petition cites the principles of
sustainable development, precaution, and intergenerational equity, as well as judicial
decisions based on similar legal principles in the Netherlands.
• The petition notes that India is the third-largest national emitter of greenhouse gases.
• The National Green Tribunal dismissed the case, reasoning that the climate change is
already covered in the process of impact assessments under the Environment
Protection Act of 1986, and therefore, "There is no reason to presume that Paris
Agreement and other international protocols are not reflected in the policies of the
Government of India or are not taken into consideration in granting environment
clearances."

M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & ORS. (1997) 2 SCC 353 -Taj Trapezium
Case
• The Petitioner said “Sulphur dioxide” emitted by the Mathura Refinery and the
adjoining industries caused “Acid Rain” that had a corroding effect on the white
marble of the Taj.
• Fungal Deterioration was also noticed in the inner chambers of Taj Mahal.
• The Taj Trapezium authority has been tasked with monitoring and implementing
various s c h e m e s f o r t h e protection of Taj Mahal.
• The Court has been directly monitoring the following issues relating to the problems
Unauthorized construction within 100 meters from the southern gate of the Taj Mahal;
Supply of gas to the industries located in Firozabad.
• Also it ordered for switching over from coal/ coke to natural gas, and relocating them
outside the TTZ or shutting down.

Association for Protection of Democratic Rights v. The State of West

Bengal and Others
• On March 25, 2021, the Supreme Court of India issued an order establishing an expert
committee to "develop a set of scientific and policy guidelines that shall govern
decision making with respect to cutting of trees for developmental projects."
• The order came in response to a petition challenging the government of West
Bengal's plans to cut hundreds of trees, some up to 150 years old, in order to construct
roads over bridges and widen roads. In considering whether the plan was in accord
with the constitutional right to a healthy environment and India's sustainable
development commitments, the Court emphasized the need to consider the impact of
such projects on carbon sequestration and climate change.
• The Court noted "that the issue assumes significance from the perspective of climate
change as a growing national and international concern" and noted India's climate
commitment to increase tree cover from 23% to 33%. The Court then constituted the
committee, comprised of seven members, and instructed it to produce the guidelines
within four weeks of its first meeting.
• The case is pending, Whether the State of West Bengal may cut hundreds of trees in
order to construct and widen roads.