BATCH 2020-25

ROUGH DRAFT OF FINAL PROJECT

“A CASE ANALYSIS ON ALMITRA H.PATEL&ORS. VS UNION
OF INDIA”

SUBJECT: - ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

SUBJECT CODE:10FL0402
SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY: -

Miss SWATI VISHAN RUCHA BHATT

Assistant PROFESSOR ROLL NO.-92001041005

FACULTY OF LAW B.COM.LLB(HONS.)

MARWADI UNIVERSITY F.O.L, MARWADI UNIVERSITY

1|Page
 DECLARATION

I, RUCHA BHATT, certify that the work embodied in this project work, entitled " A CASE ANALYSIS ON
ALMITRA H PATEL&ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA “is my own bonafide work carried out by me under the
supervision of Prof. SWATI VISHAN of Faculty of Law, Marwari University. The matter embodied in this Project has
not been submitted for the award of any other degree/diploma.

I declare that I have faithfully acknowledged, given credit to and referred to the authors/ research workers wherever their
works have been cited in the text and the body of the project. I further certify that I have not willfully lifted up some
other's work, para, text, data, results, figures etc. reported in the journals, books, magazines, reports, dissertations, theses,
etc., or available at web-sites and included them in this project work and cited as my own work.

2|Page
 SUPERVISOR CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that work embodied in the accompanying project entitled " A CASE ANALYSIS ON ALMITRA
H.PATEL&ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA” has been carried out entirely by RUCHA BHATT under my direct
supervision and guidance and that candidate has fulfilled the requirements of the regulation laid down for partial
fulfilment of B.COM. LL. B(HONS.) Degree examination in the course ENVIRONMENTAL LAW; (Semester IV),
Faculty of Law, Marwadi University.

SWATI VISHAN

Assistant Professor

F.O.L,

Marwadi University

3|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance from
the supervisor and I am extremely privileged to have got this all along the completion of my
project. All that I have done is only due to such supervision and assistance of Prof. SWATI
MISHAN I am thankful to and fortunate enough to get constant encouragement, support and
guidance from him.

Signature of the student; -

Date:
Place: Marwadi University

4|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PARTICULARS NO. OF PAGE

• FACTS 06

• ISSUES RAISED 06

• ARGEMENTS OF PETITION 06

• ARGUMENTS OF RESPONDENT 06

• JUGDEMENT 07

• REASONING OF CASE 07

• CONCLUSION 08

5|Page
FACTS OF THE CASE

Almitra H. Patel has filed a lawsuit against the Union of India over Delhi's wrongdoing. The
historic city of Delhi, the capital of India, is one of the most polluted cities in the world.
Agencies in charge of waste management and conservation have failed to provide Delhi
residents with a clean and healthy environment. It is difficult to breathe because the air is very
dirty. The Yamuna River, the city's main source of drinking water, is also a free source of
unsafe sewage and industrial waste, causing an increase in respiratory and throat infections.

Apart from air and water pollution, the city is basically a garbage dump. Garbage piled up on
Delhi is a common occurrence. The Delhi municipal government did not pay enough attention
to the problem of hazardous waste management. All of this forced Almitra H. Patel to file a
lawsuit against the Delhi municipal government. Many ailments, including respiratory and skin
disorders, plagued Delhi. All industrial waste was dumped into the Yamuna River, which
supplied drinking water to Delhi, and the waste has been contaminated since Delhi municipal
officials failed to manage it properly

ISSUES OF THE CASE

1. Was Municipal Corporation of Delhi responsible for the disorder in the management of
the wastes which affected the people of Delhi?
2. Was there lack of safai karamcharis in MCD?

ARGUMENTS ON THE SIDE OF APPELLANT

The petitioner said the organizations in charge of pollution management and conservation had
failed to provide Delhi residents with a clean and healthy environment. It is difficult to breathe
because the air is very dirty. Respiratory and throat infections are on the rise in Delhi. The
Yamuna River, which serves as the main source of drinking water, also serves as a free
dumping ground for unwashed sewage and industrial waste. Apart from air and water
pollution, the city is basically a garbage dump.

It is truly unfortunate that even though over time the Delhi situation has not changed. Residents
of Delhi suffer from respiratory and other diseases gradually, the Yamuna River is highly
polluted and untreated waste and industrial and industrial waste is dumped freely in the said
river or left in an open area, its large amount being ignored.
The law, among other things, requires them to perform their municipal functions and, at the
very least, prevent littering and littering in public places, endangering public health.

Garbage piled up on Delhi is a common occurrence. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi

(MCD), established under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (Delhi Act), has been
completely negligent in fulfilling its legal obligations. It is an undeniable fact that rapid
industrial development, urbanization, and the constant migration of people from rural areas to
cities have had a profound effect on environmental degradation; however, the authorities
responsible for the pollution control cannot be allowed to sit idly by for lack of funds or other
resources to do so.

6|Page
ARGUMENTS ON THE SIDE OF RESPONDENT

It is the responsibility of everyone involved to ensure that landfills are available for public
health. MCD does not engage in commercial ventures when it comes to providing disposal
facilities. It is the responsibility of the MCD, along with the other bodies listed above, to
ensure that adequate landfill sites are available to meet Delhi's needs for the next two decades.
There is no reason why MCD cannot provide the same because of the high cost. Garbage
dumps must be provided, and it does not make any difference to which government agency or
local government is responsible for the cost.

In his affidavit, the defendant asserted that he was working to improve the sanitation and solid
waste management of Delhi. The NDMC is said to be overcrowded, spending 35 percent of its
income on salaries, expenses and other expenses, compared to 15 to 20 percent of cities in the
world. It is said that the high rate of absenteeism among safai karamcharis has dropped from
30% to 15%, with the aim of reducing it to at least 10%. If the source of the garbage is not
known, the NDMC has stated that it should be allowed to evict all communities such as the
Residents ’Welfare Association and the Market Association as a group.

Despite instructions from Drs. B.L. In Wadehras' case, the respondent's lawyer said a sufficient
number of landfills had not yet been found or donated to them. One of the reasons for the
unavailability of these areas, according to the report, is that land management organizations
such as the DDA and the National Capital Territory Government of Delhi need a market value
of more than 40 rupees per hectare in advance. land can be given MCD. It is the government's
job to keep Delhi clean.
The Union of India Ministry of Urban Development, Delhi National Capital Territory
Government, MCD Commissioner, NDMC Chair, Cantonment Board, and DDA are among the
agencies in Delhi. It is the responsibility of everyone involved to ensure that landfills are
available for public health. MCD does not engage in commercial ventures when it comes to
providing disposal facilities. It is the responsibility of the MCD, along with the other structures
listed above, to ensure that adequate landfill sites are available to meet Delhi's needs for the
next two decades.

REASONING OF THE CASE

The main point of the discussion was that it was a waste of money. The Court ruled that the
lack of open space and public parks in today's world, where urbanization is increasing, rural
migration is widespread, and overcrowded areas are emerging, can be dangerous to health.
That social welfare was improved by converting a low park into a private nursing home was a
disregard for the true nature of the two and their work. It is difficult to estimate how much
garbage has been smuggled into our country illegally
The amount of hazardous waste that has entered our country despite the court ban is a clear
indication that there is something wrong with the regulation of hazardous waste management,
and that the current laws do not apply. As mentioned earlier, the authorities in this case were
completely unaware of the hazardous waste that was being smuggled into the country, let alone
its proper management and disposal in an environmentally friendly manner.

The Supreme Court expanded the "doctrine of public trust," ruling that the state is the
7|Page
custodian of natural resources intended for the use and recreation of the public by their nature.
The state is also a trustee and has a legal obligation to protect natural resources. Anyone who
violates the ecological balance and thus harms ecology should be held accountable and
punished.

Affected authorities should take immediate action if there is an environmental hazard.

Information about each industry details, hazardous waste recycled, recycled, and landfill
should be sent to interested NGOs.

The case gave all residents a broad view of the resident's responsibility for waste management.
Namely:

(1) A resident who generates hazardous waste in the Scheme's list in quantities equal to or
exceeds the limits given in the column of the said Schedule, shall take all reasonable
steps to ensure that such waste is properly disposed of and disposed of without any
adverse consequences. which may be the result of such waste and the occupier shall also
be responsible for the proper collection, receipt, treatment, storage and disposal of such
waste either by himself or through a local operator.
(2) The occupier or any other representative person who intends to cause hazardous waste to
be treated by the operator of the facility under subsection (1), shall provide the site
operator, with unspecified information. by the State Pollution Control Board.
This case also helped to discuss the need for a Legal Framework / Local Management
Guidelines. Even though the Supreme Court ruled that landfill sites were not a permanent
solution to solid waste disposal and promoted compost crops as an alternative, it recognized
that in the next two decades, landfill would be the norm for solid waste disposal.

In addition, the case has shown a number of different consequences, including labor law
conflicts and disputes between two legal entities. In order to make the rules, the Supreme Court
had to rely on the general provisions of the Constitution of India, such as the fundamental
rights and principles of State Policy, as well as common common provisions in by-laws, such
as the construction, maintenance, and purification of water pipes. and drainage services, as
well as public toilets, urinals, and the like.

The main idea of the case was the administration and the hazardous waste that harmed the
citizens, their right to live in a healthy and secure environment

JUDGMENT

This has been India’s most significant case involving solid waste. Mrs. Almitra Patel and
others have filed a PIL before the Apex Court under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, in
which the Petitioner demanded an immediate and urgent improvement in the current methods
for the treatment of Municipal Solid Waste or garbage in India. The Tribunal determined that
the situation was massive since over a lakh ton of raw rubbish is discarded every day just
outside the city limits, and there is no suitable treatment for this rubbish, which is deposited on
land, along highways, and in lakes.

The Tribunal emphasized the need of converting this waste into a source of electricity and fuel
8|Page
that can be used for the benefit of society, in accordance with the Circular Economy Principles.
The tribunal identified it as one of India’s significant challenges in recent years, since lakhs of
tons of waste being thrown outside of cities on the periphery without being properly treated.
The tribunal emphasized the need of resolving this issue and turning it into a source of power
for the benefit of society. The tribunal issued over 25 directives after hearing the case.

CONCLUSION

This case shows us how important a healthy and clean environment is to man. According to a
court order, the case was a major case for the management and administration of hazardous
waste. Following the case, the court took stern action against those responsible for non-
response at Delhi Municipal Corporation. Following the case, the regulation was introduced as
a strong function for metropolitan companies, which has greatly benefited urban dwellers.

Risk management has improved as a result of this case. The management of the organization
must report immediately, otherwise serious action will be taken, according to the court order. I
appreciate Almitra H. Patel's determination to lend his expertise to this cause for the benefit of
the community. The importance of the legal framework was evident in his efforts.

REFERENCES

The Constitution of India, 1950

www.legitquest.com
www.manupatra.org

9|Page