By: Rajdeep Dutta
Citation: AIR 1996 SC 2715: (1996) 5 SCC 647
Bench: Justice Kuldip Singh, Justice Faizan Uddin, Justice K. Venkataswami
Court: Supreme Court
Date of Judgement: Apr-07-2016
Facts of the Case
The Petitioner ‘Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum’ filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 32 of the Constitution. This petition was filed against the enormous scope of natural debasement and water contamination caused due to excessive release of untreated effluents by the tanneries and other industries of Tamil Nadu into the river Palar.
River Palar is the main source of portable water for the nearby surrounding areas and the heavy contamination of it via effluents discharged from various tanneries and factories had resulted in serious water pollution which had made it unfit for use. The discharge of pollutants was not restricted to the water body only but had also been discharged in the nearby agricultural fields, Waterways and open roads.
Later, it was discovered by Tamil Nadu Agricultural Research Centre, Vellore that an approximate of 35,000 hectares of agricultural land had turned entirely or partially unsuitable for cultivation. This case was decided in 2016. This is one of the Landmark cases decided by The Supreme Court where the Apex Court examined and analysed the relationship between environment and industrial development and entrenched the principle of preventive methodology in environmental protection.[1]
Issues Raised
1. Whether the tanneries and factories should be allowed to keep on working at the expense of the health of millions of individuals and the environment?
2. It was submitted by the petitioner the entire surface and sub-soil water of river Palar has been polluted resulting in the non-availability of potable water to the residents of the area. It is stated that the tanneries in the State of Tamil Nadu have caused environmental degradation in the area.
The Argument of the Petitioner
An autonomous review led by Peace Members, a non-legislative association, covering 13 towns of Dindigal and PeddiarChatramAnchayat Unions, uncovers that 350 well out of an absolute 467 utilized for drinking and water system purposes have been dirtied. The Same survey was submitted by the petitioner in support of his contentions. The Petitioner submitted another report which was a survey conducted by lawyers M.R. Ramanan and P.S. Subramaniam on the Legal Aid and Advice Board of Tamil Nadu’s request. It was conducted in Solar village. It stated that 176 chemicals were found in the tannery effluents. The amount of Chemicals being released by the Tanneries into the water bodies would both in the short and long term cause irreversible damage to the surroundings. It was also mentioned that about 40 litres of water are required to process only 1 kilogram of leather which is an excessive amount and would sooner or later deplete the water source.
Aside from this, an overview led by the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Research Center, Vellore, showed that roughly 35,000 hectares of land in the tanneries belt had been delivered unsuitable for development either absolutely or to some degree. Above all it was contended that the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and the public authority had been asking the tanneries for about the most recent decade to set up either a Common Effluent Treatment Plant for a gathering of themselves or set up their different profluent treatment plants. The Central Government likewise said that it would give sponsorships to the foundation of Common Effluent Treatment Plants. Yet, the vast majority of the tanneries were working without treatment plants.
The Arguments of the Respondent
Learned counsel for the Respondents brought up an objection that the standard with respect to total dissolved solids (TDS) fixed by the Board was not defended. This Court by the request dated April 9, 1996 coordinated the NEERI to look at this perspective and offer its viewpoint. In its report dated June 11, 1996, NEERI has advocated the principles specified by the Board. The Ministry of Environment and backwoods (MEF) has not completely set down principles for inland surface water release for total dissolved solids(TDS), sulfates and chlorides. The choice of these norms rests with the individual State Pollution Control Boards according to the prerequisites in light of neighbourhood site conditions. The principles specified by the TNPCB are supported by the before-alluded contemplations. The endorsed norms of the TNPCB for inland surface water release can be met for tannery squander waters cost-really through appropriate embed control measures in tanning activity and effectively operated wastewater treatment plants (ETPs & CETPs).
Judgement
The Hon’ble Court observed that in pursuant of its order some tanneries had set up individual pollution control devices but despite that they were closed. The Court held that no tanneries can be allowed to operate unless it has satisfied the necessary pollution control standards and further directed the Pollution Control Board to inspect the units and file a report regarding this.
The Court further directed that all those Units which are not in a position to construct the effluent treatment devices within this period may approach the Board as and when they complete the devices. The North Arcot District and Chengai MGR District Association and other Associations of the Tanners shall bear the expenses of the inspection teams organized by the Boards.
• The Supreme Court examining the report delivered its judgment making all efforts to maintain a harmony between the environment and development.
• The Court admitted that these Tanneries in India are the major foreign exchange earner and also provide employment to several thousands of people. But at the same time, it destroys the environment and poses a health hazard to everyone.
• The court delivering its judgment in favor of petitioners directed all the Tanneries to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000 as fine in the office of Collector as fine
• The Court further directed the State of Tamil Nadu to award Mr M. C. Mehta with a sum of Rs. 50,000 as appreciation for his efforts for the protection of the Environment.
• The Court in this case also emphasized the constitution of Green Benches in India dealing specifically with matters relating to environment protection and also for speedy and expeditious disposal of environmental cases.
Critical Analysis
Clearly, the Environment Act contains helpful arrangements for controlling tainting. Taking into account that the essential inspiration driving the Act is to make power under Section 3(3) of the Act with agreeable powers to control tainting and protect the environment. It's a pity to date no power has been contained by the Central Government. The work as most would consider being normal to be done by a specialist to the extent that Section 3(3) read with various game plans of the Act is being done by this Court and various Courts in the country. The time has come for the Central Government to comprehend its responsibility and legitimate commitment to defend the tainting environment in the country. Expecting the conditions in the five districts of Tamil Nadu, where tanneries are working, are permitted to continue with then in the near future all streams/streams will be dirtied, underground waters soiled, cultivating territories turned fruitless and the occupants of the area introduced to real disorders. It is, consequently, crucial for this Court to direct the Central Government to take fast action under the game plans of the Environment Act.
The Constitutional and legitimate courses of action protect a singular's more right than wrong to outside air, clean water and defilement-free environment, but the wellspring of the right is the essential standard guideline right of a clean environment. There are more than 900 tanneries working in the five regions of Tamil Nadu. Some of them may, right now, have presented the essential tainting control measures, they have been dirtying the environment for more than 10 years and on occasion regardless, for a more lengthy period. This Court has in various orders exhibited that these tanneries are in danger to pay pollution fines. The polluters ought to compensate the affected individuals and besides pay the cost of restoring the hurt climate.
Conclusion
This is one of the milestone decisions given by the Supreme Court of India on the questions of insurance of climate. The Supreme Court applied the idea of Sustainable improvement while condemning the said matter. It applied this idea through the polluter pays standard and the prudent guideline[2]. It accurately directed out that it isn't right toward doing advancement of businesses at the expense of the well-being and lives of individuals and subsequently it ought not to be allowed. Manageable advancement implies that the necessities of the current age ought to be satisfied without hurting or obliterating the climate and regular assets required for the group of people yet to come. Hence, by keeping this perspective on adjusting the modern turn of events and natural assurance as to the main priority, the court precluded as needs be. Additionally, by remembering the polluter pay standard the court requested the fine. As it is critical that whoever has dirtied the climate and made harm it should repay the harmed property or individual.
References
I) (1996) 5 SCC 647
ii)https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/16614/1/epa_1986.pdf((Accessed on 10 May 2021)
iii)https://lawsisto.com/legalnewsread/OTA0NA==/Case-Analysis-Vellore-Citizens-Welfare-Forum-vs-Union-of-India((Accessed on 10 May 2021)
Comments