UNIT-II NOTES

A. Protection of Environment under the Indian Constitution

➢ INTRODUCTION
A rapid increase in global warming, deforestation, air, water and other forms of pollution is
posing a great threat to the environment and its living beings. The degradation of the
environment through a plethora of activities carried on by individuals is detrimental to the
health of all the living beings, including human beings, plants and animals.
Fundamental status has been given to the concept of protecting the environment as it is essential
to promote human health to have a healthy environment and affords a right to a healthy
environment to all. Preserving the environment protects the health of every individual and a
healthy individual promotes the development of the environment which is the need of the hour.

➢ THE PREAMBLE OF THE CONSTITUTION AND ENVIRONMENT

PROTECTION
The Preamble of Indian Constitution begins by stating that people of India solemnly resolve
to constitute India into a socialist country. This indicates that our Constitution affords us
with the socialist pattern of society. Thus, aiming at dealing with and solving social problems
first, rather than concentrating on individual problems. Here, what is in the interest of the public
is of utmost importance.
Presence of pollutants in the atmosphere in excess of the prescribed limit is one of the major
social issues to be given due regard. It is not only exploiting the health of living beings but is
also degrading the quality of the environment in each day.
The basic aim of Preamble is socialism and it is the responsibility of the state to fulfil this by
taking stringent measures to make the environment free from all forms of pollution. The
obligation of the state further includes providing not only a pollution free environment but also
a decent standard of living to all living beings.
All the citizens of India intend to secure freedom which also includes securing justice. Justice
can be interpreted and sought in many forms. Thus, citizens have a right to environmental
justice. Increasing degradation of the environment is posing a great threat to the lives of living
beings and hence, protecting the environment is becoming a crucial in each day of life because
ignoring it would pose a serious threat to the environment at large.
The state has the duty to comply with all the provisions and since India is declared to be
the Democratic Republic, the citizens of this country hold a very essential right to have looked
upon the conduct of the state and provisions being taken by the government from time to time
to restore the environment.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
 ➢ LEGISLATIVE POWERS AND MATTERS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
Under the Indian Constitution, there are three types of lists, namely- Union, state and
concurrent.
Powers of the government are shared at the state and union level. Central government deals
with the matters of union list, where state government deals with the matters of state list. Thus,
the exclusive power to legislate the matters of union list, which is the list I, is with the
Parliament. State list which is the list II covers matters like, sanitation, the health of the public,
drainage, supply of clean water etc. It covers matters relating to defence, military, atomic
energy, regulation of oil fields, air traffic etc.
Power of dealing with the matters of the concurrent list (list III) is shared between both the
state and central government. It covers matters like protection of forests, wildlife, conserving
mines, population control etc. But in the instance of conflict, the decision of the central
government prevails.
The legislative and administrative relations between the central and the state government are
specifically dealt in with the part XI of the Constitution. The power to make rules for the whole
country is with the Parliament of the country, while for that of the state lies with the state
government of every state.
In an instance of passing state laws subsequent to the central laws, for it to prevail, requires a
Presidential assent first as in accordance with Article 254.
In the situation of national emergency, Parliament has the power to legislate the state subjects
also. The division of these legislative powers is essential to make provisions which can deal
with environmental problems.
There are various projects taken up by the state to develop the environment but they might pose
a serious threat to the environment. In such circumstances there is always a conflict between
development and environment protection and such matters are dealt through the Environment
Impact Assessment (EIA). This has also been recognized by the planning commission.

➢ INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS

A plethora of international agreements dealing with environmental protection have been made
and India has been a signatory to it. Because at the Stockholm declaration in 1972, it was
held that the world has one environment. India being a signatory to such international pacts is
under an obligation to translate those provisions and follow them in the country. This has been
clearly stated in Article 51(c) of the Indian constitution that state shall foster respect for
international law and the obligations of the treaties.
Another essential provision dealing in protecting the environment is Article 253 of the
Constitution which empowers the Parliament of our country to make laws which can be
applicable to the whole or any territory of the country for implementing any agreement or
convention signed with the other country or countries.
Parliament can further legislate to implement decisions taken at any conference on an
international level. Any provision made in the context of environmental protection in
Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED
(Assistant Professor)
accordance with Article 253 read with articles 13 and 14 cannot be questioned before the court
of law on the grounds of no legislative competence.
With the use of this power, it is pertinent to know that Parliament has enacted Air ( Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, and Environment Protection Act, 1986. It has been
clearly stated in the Preamble of these acts that the purpose of their enactment was to implement
the decisions taken at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, held at
Stockholm in the year 1972.
In Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India, the supreme court held that it is essential
to incorporate the international customary laws in the municipal laws, provided they are not
contrary to them. It is an accepted principle of law. Thus, it was considered essential to follow
international laws by the domestic courts of law.

➢ OBLIGATION OF STATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

The authorities are under the obligation to follow the law and regularize the conduct for the
benefit of the people who have elected them. Article 47 puts an obligation on the state that it
shall regard the raising level of nutrition and standard of living of its people. Also, the primary
duty of the state shall be to improve public health. It is the responsibility of the state to prohibit
except for medicinal purposes, the consumption of alcohol and drugs which can be injurious to
the health of the living beings and pose a great threat to their lives.
From the word “responsibility” it can be interpreted that state shall take effective, adequate and
necessary steps to improve the health and standard of living of all and promote awareness in
the context of environmental protection. In the environment development projects cannot be
taken up by the individuals which harm society as a whole. Thus, the state needs to keep a
stringent check on these activities and projects.
There have been various reasons due to which level of pollution in the environment is
constantly increasing. For eg., water pollution is commonly caused due to the draining of
impure water in the rivers and which not only pollutes the natural resource of the country but
affects the health of citizens. This lead to the urgent need of making provisions to obligate the
state to preserve and protect the environment.
In the case of Hamid Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the state was negligent to supply water
from the handpumps, colossal damage was caused to the citizens, which affected their health
massively. Hence, due to this gross negligence on the part of the state, it was held that the state
failed to perform its basic duty.
In the year 1976, the constitution was amended. With this amendment, Article 48-A was
inserted in the constitution with the aim to afford better provisions so as to preserve and protect
the environment. The provision of this article imposes the duty on the state to protect and
improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. The word
“Environment” has been interpreted widely in this article. The state shall not only play a role
of being protectionists but also enact adequate measures for improvement of the environment.
Every natural resource is interconnected with other natural resources of this country. Forests
are directly linked with providing pollution-free air, helps in reducing global warming and is

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
also connected with water resources. They help in maintaining the ecological balance. Thus,
this resource is crucial and hence, its protection is equally important to avoid atmospheric
pollution. Hence, the specific insertion of this section is justified.
➢ OBLIGATION OF CITIZENS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
The duties of the state in protecting the environment are basically the rights of the citizens. The
concept of rights and duties respectively, co-exist. They are interconnected. If citizens have the
right to a decent standard of living and a pollution free environment, then at the same time they
are obliged to protect it and not carry on activities which prove to be dangerous for the society
at large and all other living beings.
The concept of rights was quite prevalent in comparison to the concept of duties prior to the
42nd amendment of the constitution. More importance was attached to rights than duties by
the supreme law of the land. But the drafters of the constitution felt that it is necessary to
shoulder the burden of protecting environment between both the state and the citizens. Also,
citizens were more concerned with their rights and started neglecting their duties. Thus, part
IV–A was inserted by The Constitution (Forty Second) Amendment Act,1976.
Part IV-A of the constitution deals with Fundamental Duties. Article 51-A(g) specifically deals
with the fundamental duty of the citizens to protect and improve the natural environment which
includes forests, rivers, lakes, wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures. Like the
duty of the state, it is the duty of all the citizens of not only protecting the environment but also
taking measures which are adequate enough to improve the environment.
Nature has gifted us with the resources and a pollution free environment and thus, this casts a
duty upon the citizens to keep these resources in the same condition for the future generations.
Hence, the principle of intergenerational equity plays a major role in environmental protection
by sustainable use of natural resources.
In Kinkeri Devi v. State, Himachal High Court that in Article 48-A and Article 51-A(g) it was
held that it is both constitutional pointer to the state and the constitutional duty of the citizens
not only protect the environment but also improve it and to preserve and safeguard the forests,
the flora and the fauna, the rivers and the lakes and all other water resources of the country.
The negligence to abide by the pointer or perform the duty is nothing basically the straight
betrayal of the fundamental law of the land.
In the case of betrayal, the courts cannot remain a silent spectator. A court can intervene at any
time to make the implementation of the provisions by issuing writs, orders and directions as it
thinks fit and necessary.
In L.K Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors, the municipality of Jaipur was being negligent in
carrying on its basic duty of maintaining the hygiene of the state. This caused acute sanitation
problem thereby leading to the to have hazardous effects on the lives of the people of the state.
Mr Koolwal along with other residents moved an application under article 226 of the Indian
constitution before the high court highlighting the gross negligence of the municipality.
While construing the true scope of Article 51-A in this case the court explained that this article
is not only a duty but is aright created in favour of the citizens to have the locus standing to
move to the court to have a check on the conduct of the state activities, whether the authorities

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
are performing their duties or not in accordance with the fundamental law of the land. The right
to move to the court is granted to citizens for the proper enforcement of the state’s duties and
of their relevant departments, local bodies etc.
Being negligent in maintaining hygiene and sanitation standards slowly affects the lives of
living beings and poisons the environment at large. This infringes the fundamental right of life
of the citizen as provided under article 21, which also extends to have a decent standard of living
and a clean and safe environment and thus, citizens protecting their fundamental right to life
from being infringed is justified. Thus, the court directed the municipality to remove the dirt
and all the filthy material which was posing a great threat to the lives and health of the people.
In another case of Goa Foundation v. the State of Goa, the petitioner was a society registered
under the rules relating to registration of societies and its members were the citizens of India
who had a fundamental duty to protect and improve the environment, lakes, forests, rivers and
have compassion for living creatures as laid down under article 51-A . The question of whether
the society had locus standi to move to the court or not was raised before the court.

➢ RIGHT TO LIFE AND ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

Article 21 of the constitution provides for the fundamental right of life. It states that no person
shall be deprived of his right to life or personal liberty except in accordance with procedures
established by law. The words “except in accordance with procedures established by law” can
be interpreted to mean that this provision is subject to exception and is regulated by law which
varies from case to case.
Since the provision begins with the word ‘no’ that is the reason it has been given a negative
impact. But post-Maneka period this provision has been given a positive interpretation and
positively casts a duty on the state to enforce the due implementation of this law.
Right to life includes the right to have a dignified life and also the bare necessities of life like
food, shelter, clean water and clothes. The right to live extends to having a decent and clean
environment in which individuals can live safely without any threat to their lives. An
environment shall be free from diseases and all sorts of infections.
This is crucial because the right to life can be fulfilled only when one lives in a clean, safe and
disease-free environment, otherwise granting such right would prove to be meaningless. This
aspect of Article 21 has been evidently discussed in the case of Rural Litigation and
Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of Uttar Pradesh, where the petitioner along with the
other citizens wrote to the supreme court expressing their views against the progressive mining
which denuded the Mussoorie hills of trees and forests and soil erosion. This lead to having an
adverse effect on the environment and resulted in landslides along with blockage of
underground water channels.
The registry was ordered by the Hon’ble supreme court to consider this letter as a writ filed
under article 32 of the Constitution.
An expert committee was appointed in this behalf by the Supreme Court to advise the Hon’ble
court with some technical issue. On the basis of the report provided by the expert committee,
the court provided the limestone quarries to be closed because it was infringing the right to life

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
and personal liberty. Quarrying operations lead to ecological degradation and air and water
pollution, which affected the lives of the people to a great extent.
In L.K Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors, Rajasthan High Court held that maintaining the
quality of the environment, sanitation and health is covered under the purview of Article 21 of
the Constitution. Because non-compliance to do so can adversely affect the lives of many
citizens and slow poisoning along with reducing the life of a citizen.
In Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India, it was held that the duty of the state is to take adequate
and effective steps for the enforcement and protection of Constitutional rights guaranteed
under Article 21, 48-A and 51-A(g).
In M.C Mehta v. Union of India, due to stone crushing activities in and around Delhi was
causing a huge problem of pollution in the environment. The court was conscious of the
inevitable consequences and the ecological problems caused due to the industrial activities in
the country. In the name of environmental development, it cannot be permitted to degrade the
quality of the ecology and increase different forms of pollution to the extent that it becomes a
health hazard to the lives of all the citizens. It was further held that citizens have a right to fresh
air and have a pollution-free environment in which they live.
Further, the scope of article 21 was broadened by the judiciary to include under its purview the
right to livelihood as well. It includes the right of citizens to earn their livelihood along with
the right to life. The wider interpretation of this article has proved to be beneficial in keeping
a strict check on the conduct and actions of the government in the context of measures taken
by the authorities to protect the environment. It is also beneficial in keeping a check on the
activities of the state which can have a massive impact on the environment, health of the
individuals and threat to the livelihood of poor.
Indian judiciary has been very conscious while dealing with the matters of development and
the environment protection to avoid the conflict between the two aspects.
In the famous Taj Mahal Case, ample of industries near Taj Trapezium Zone were using coke
and coal as an industrial fuel. These industries were ordered to be relocated to an alternative
site as provided under Agra Master Plan. The rights and duties of the workmen in the industries
were also specified by the court following the principle of sustainable development.
➢ RIGHT TO EQUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Equality before the law and equal protection of the law has been granted under article 14 of the
Constitution. This fundamental right impliedly casts a duty upon the state to be fair while taking
actions in regard to environmental protection and thus, cannot infringe article 14. In cases of
exercise of arbitrary powers on behalf of the state authorities, the judiciary has played a strict
role in disallowing the arbitrary sanction. Use of discretionary powers without measuring the
interest of the public violates the fundamental right of equality of the people.
In Bangalore Medical Trust V. B.S Muddappa, an improvement scheme was prepared by the
City Improvement Board of Bangalore for the purpose of extending the city. A low-level park
was to be developed for which an area was kept under this scheme. But under the direction of
the chief minister the area kept for the low-level park was to be converted into the civic amenity
site where the hospital was to be constructed. As soon as the construction began, the residents
moved to the high court.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
The petition moved in by the residents was allowed by the high court. But in appeal to the
supreme court, the appellant contended that the power to allot sites is completely a
discretionary one and the developing authority has the right to allow the site for making hospital
rather than a park. And thus, the diverted use of the land was justified in the eyes of the
appellant.
By explaining the importance of open spaces and parks in the development of urban areas, the
supreme court rejected the appeal. The Hon’ble court further stated that the open spaces,
recreation, playing grounds and protection of ecology are the matters of vital importance in the
interest of public and crucial for the development. Keeping open spaces for the interest of the
public is justified cannot be sold or given on lease to any private person solely for the sake of
monetary gains.
➢ FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION AND ENVIRONMENT
Right of speech and expression is a fundamental right expressly mentioned in article 19(1)(a) of
Part III of the Constitution. There have been a number of cases where people have approached
the court through the way of speech and expressing themselves by writing letters like that in
the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of Uttar
Pradesh where they have expressed the violation of their right to have a clean and safe
environment and a right to livelihood.
In India, the media has been playing a crucial role in moulding the perception of people in
issues relating to the environment. Thus, Article 19(1)(a) is interpreted to include the freedom
of the press as well.
➢ FREEDOM OF TRADE AND COMMERCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
All the citizens of India have a fundamental right to carry on any profession or business, trade
or commerce at any place within the territory of India under Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution.
But this is not an absolute right and thus, has reasonable restrictions to it. Article 19(6) of the
Constitution lays down the reasonable restriction to this fundamental right to avoid the
environmental hazards.
The purpose is to avoid the ecological imbalance and degradation of the atmosphere in the
name of carrying on a trade, business, occupation or carrying on any profession. Thus, in the
name of business or profession, one cannot cause harm to the environment.
In M.C Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1037 certain tanneries were discharging effluents
in the holy river Ganga which was causing water pollution. Further, no primary treatment plant
was being set up despite the constant reminders. It was held by the court to stop the tanneries
from working because the effluents drained were ten times more noxious as compared to the
ordinary sewage water which flows into the river.
The court ordered while directing tanneries to be stopped from working which have failed to
take necessary steps as required for the primary treatment of effluents from the industries. The
court while passing this order contended that, though the court is conscious about the
unemployment that might usher due to the closure of the tanneries but health, life and ecology
holds greater importance in the eyes of law.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
In M.C Mehta v. Union of India, 1994, it was directed by the Supreme Court that the
industries who did not comply or adhere to, with the prior direction of the Hon’ble court
regarding the installation of air pollution controlling system should be closed. In this case, the
supreme court laid down its greater emphasis on Article 19(6) of the Constitution.
In S. Jagannath v. Union of India , sea beaches and sea coasts were considered to be the gifts of
nature, by the Hon’ble supreme court and any such activity which pollutes these natural
resources or the gift of nature cannot be permitted to function. In this case, a shrimp farming
culture industry by modern method causing degradation to the ecosystem, discharge of
polluting effluents, polluting the potable ground-water and depletion of the plantation. All of
these activities were held to be violative of constitutional provisions and other legislation
dealing with environmental matters, by the court.
The court further held that before the installation of any such industry in a fragile coastal area
it is essential for them to necessarily pass the strict environmental test. In other
words, reasonable restrictions can be laid in accordance with Article 19(6) of the Constitution.

B. CRIMINAL LAW PROVISIONS ON ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

PROVISIONS UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860.
The Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of Indian also known as Bhopal Leak case brought
awareness to the hazards of development of special laws for the environment protection. Thus,
in the year 1986 Environment Protection came into force. In the Indian Penal Code, 1860, under
Chapter IV the environment protection concept is been dealt with offences relating to public
health, safety, decency, convenience morals under sections such as 268, 269, 270, 279
280,287,288,290,291 and 294.
The Indian Penal Code under section 268 defines Public Nuisance.
The essential ingredients of sections 268 are:
➢ Commencing act or an illegal omission.
➢ Such act or illegal omission must cause any “ common injury” damage or annoyance
to the public etc. And that must necessarily cause injury.
➢ The Indian Penal Code under section 290 defines punishment for Public Nuisance.
➢ In this section the punishments for public nuisance includes pollution cases also, in
cases not otherwise provided for.
➢ The offenders will be punished with fine which may extend to 200rupees.
The Kerala High Court in the case [Link] v. State of Kerala held that smoking, in
any form in public place is a public nuisance and cases can be filed under section 290 of the
Indian Penal Code as it is in violation of article 21 of the Constitution of India ie “Right to
Life”.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
The Indian Penal Code under section 277 defines Water Pollution.
In the Nano Rao Case, the accused and 9 others were charged under section 277 of the Indian
Penal Code with the offence of foaling water of the river and rendering it unfit for drinking by
steeping therein aloe plants with a view to existing fibers there from. In this case river was not
considered as public spring under section 277 bit however under section 290 it was a case of
nuisance.
The Indian Penal Code under section 278 defines :
According to the section 278 of the Act whoever voluntarily vitiates the atmosphere in any
place so as to make it noxious to health of the person is general dwelling or carrying on business
in the neighbourhood or passing along a public way, shall be punished with fine which may
extend to five hundred rupees.
The Indian Penal Code under section 284 provides punishment for negligent conduct and
section 285 with respect to poisonous substances and negligent conduct with respect to firee or
combustible matter respectively. The punishments and fine we’re enhanced eventually.
The Indian Penal Code under section 286 provides punishment for negligent conduct with
respect to explosive substances.
The Indian Penal Code under section 425 – water pollution can be punished for mischief.
If the act causes wrongful loss or damage to public or to any person or if his act causes water
pollution could be brought under section 511 of the Act.
The Indian Penal Code under section 440 deals with mischief caused by killing maiming
animals and cattle.
Nuisance is defined in very liberal terms and includes construction of structure, disposal of
substances, conduct of trade or occupation. For disobedience of orders, the court can impose
penalty as per section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The punishment is provided for a
Mac period of 6 months and fine which may be extended to 1 thousand rupees.

➢ PROVISIONS UNDER CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE ACT, 1973.

The Provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in it’s Chapter X provides for
public nuisance cases including insanitary conditions, Air, Water and Noise pollution. Under
sections such as 133, 144.
Under section 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code
Section 133 provides that a District Magistrate or Subordinate Magistrate or any other
Executive Magistrate especially empowered on this behalf by the State Government can make
a conditional order to remove such nuisance, and if the nuisance maker objects to do so, the
order will be made absolute etc.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
This section provides a speedy and summary remedy incase of urgency where damages to
public interest or public health etc is concerned.
There are various conditions precedent in order to make an application before section
133 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
1. The Magistrate must be satisfied that it is a public nuisance vast number of people need to
be affect.
2. The dispute among the said public need to be same.
3. It should be a great emergency of imminent danger to the public interest.
The judiciary has arrived hard to interpret the provisions to provide a speedy and simple remedy
for the environmental pollution issues. By invoking the Criminal Procedure Code and other
relevant Criminal provisions better environmental governance can be gained.
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh appreciating the provisions in Shaukant Case observed
that section 133 of the CrPc provided, a speedy and summary remedy in case of urgency where
danger to public interest or public health is concerned.
Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code
As per section 144 an Executive Magistrate is conferred with powers to deal with emergent
situation by imposing restrictions on the personal liberty of individuals, whether in a specific
locality or in a town itself.
Where the situation has the potential to cause unrest or danger to peace and tranquility in such
an area, due to certain dispute.
The section 144 of CrPc is best for avoiding public nuisance and protecting the environment.
Provisions under Indian Penal Code and The Criminal Procedure Code have been interpreted
himself by the Indian Judiciary for environment protection.
CONCLUSION
The above paper sums up the environment related issues and the provisional which deal with
the same in both civil and criminal aspects. This paper covers majorly on the criminal aspects.
The environment pollution cannot be curbed completely. It can only be prevented eventually
using the provisions. The need to given more awareness regarding the after effects of such
pollution in depth. Also the punishments provide so that the people do not commit such crimes.

C. CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

Environmental issues are the harmful effects of human activities on the environment. These
include pollution, overpopulation, waste disposal, climate change, global warming, the
greenhouse effect, etc.
Various environment protection programs are being practised at the individual, organizational
and government levels with the aim of establishing a balance between man and the
environment.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
Some of the current environmental issues that require urgent attention are:
➢ Climate Change
Climate change is a great concern in today’s scenario. This problem has surfaced in the last
few decades. Greenhouse gases are the major cause of climate change. Environmental changes
have several destructive impacts such as the melting of glaciers, change in seasons, epidemics,
etc.
➢ Global Warming
The burning of fossil fuels, emissions from automobiles and chlorofluorocarbons add to the
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This has led to an increase in the earth’s temperature
causing environmental changes. This increase in temperature across the globe is known as
global warming.
➢ Ozone Layer Depletion
The ozone layer is a layer of concentrated ozone gas. It protects us from the sun’s harmful
ultraviolet rays. This very important layer is being destroyed by CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons),
which are used in industries and everyday life (e.g. aerosol cans).
The chlorine in these compounds destroys the ozone layer. The hole in the ozone layer leaves
humans and wildlife exposed to harmful UV rays resulting in several skin diseases including
cancer.
➢ Water Pollution
The introduction of harmful substances into rivers, oceans, lakes and ponds, which changes the
physical, chemical or biological condition of the water is called water pollution. The polluted
water lacks oxygen and therefore the organisms die. Water is the main source of life and
therefore it is our prime duty to prevent it from any kind of pollution.
➢ Air Pollution
Air pollution is the result of emissions from industries, automobiles, and the increasing use of
fossil fuels. The gaseous emissions have added to an increase in the temperature of the earth.
Not only this, but it had also increased the risk of diseases among individuals.
➢ Solid Waste Management
Solid-waste management is defined as the discipline associated with the generation, storage,
collection, transfer and transport, processing, and disposal of solid waste in a manner that it
does not have a harmful effect on the environment.
➢ Deforestation
Deforestation is the depletion of trees and forests at an alarming rate. The trees provide us with
oxygen, and several raw materials and also maintain the temperature of the earth. Due to the
depletion of trees for commercial purposes, there has been a drastic change in the earth’s
climate.
Forests are an abode to a large number of wild animals and plants. Destruction of forests has
led to the elimination of a large number of plants and animal species affecting biodiversity.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
 ➢ Overpopulation
The earth’s population is increasing drastically. It is estimated to be more than seven billion.
The increasing population has led to a shortage of resources. If this continues, it will be very
difficult to sustain such a huge population. The other environmental issues including pollution,
waste management, deforestation, climate change and global warming are all associated with
overpopulation.

D. PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Introduction
Public Interest Litigation is a legal mechanism that allows any person, organization, or group
to approach the court on behalf of the public or for the protection of public interest. PIL in
environmental law has been instrumental in promoting environmental protection and
conservation in India.
PIL can be filed against both public and private entities who are violating environmental laws
or causing harm to the environment. PIL is often used to address issues related to environmental
protection, pollution control, conservation of natural resources, and sustainable development.
PIL helps to promote transparency and accountability in governance by holding public
authorities responsible for their actions or inactions regarding environmental protection. PIL in
environmental law has also helped to create awareness among citizens about environmental
issues and their rights. It has empowered people to take action against environmental violations
and seek redressal from the judiciary.
Illustrations of PIL in Environmental Protection
The Supreme Court of India has passed several landmark judgments of environmental law in
response to PILs filed by environmental activists and groups. These judgments have resulted
in the ban of hazardous industries, the closure of polluting factories, and the implementation
of various pollution control measures.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs. Union of
India, issued a warning to industries that discharge dangerous substances like Oleum and H
acid. The court stated that such pollution is a violation of the right to a safe and healthy
environment and, ultimately, the right to life.
Similarly, in the case of M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court declared that
vehicular emissions causing air pollution in Delhi constitute a violation of the right to life under
Article 21 of the Constitution. The court directed all commercial vehicles operating in Delhi to
switch to CNG fuel mode to safeguard the health of the public.
Moreover, in Church of God (Full Gospel) in India vs. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare
Association, the Supreme Court ruled that noise pollution amounts to a violation of Article 21
of the Constitution.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)
In the landmark case of Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum vs. Union of India, the Supreme
Court allowed a public-spirited social organization to represent the residents of Vellore to
protect their health. In this case, the tanneries located around the Palar River in Vellore, Tamil
Nadu, were found to be discharging toxic chemicals into the river, endangering the health of
the residents. As a result, the Court ordered the tanneries to close their businesses.
Conclusion
Public Interest Litigation in environmental law has played a significant role in promoting
environmental protection and conservation in India. PIL has empowered citizens to take action
against environmental violations and seek relief from the judiciary. PIL has also helped to
create awareness among citizens about environmental issues and their rights.
The landmark judgments passed by the Supreme Court in response to PILs have led to the
establishment of various institutions, the adoption of new environmental laws and regulations,
and the implementation of pollution control measures.

Prepared by- AREEF MOHAMMED

(Assistant Professor)