IMP CASES ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
ENVIRONMENTALISM
• Vinayog vs Maharashtra: Even birds have a right to quality of life, here birds were
taken from one place to another in a very bad condition.
ENVIRONMENT AND CONSTITUTION
• Koolwal vs Rajasthan: Under article 51A the citizens can make the state do their
duty to protect the environment.
INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY
• Ganesh Woods vs Himachal Pradesh: Indefinite felling of trees for producing katha,
court held that present generation should protect the resources for the future
generation.
• Rao vs State: Sustainable development means protection of the environment also.
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
• Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs UOI: Tanneries in vellore polluting rivers, court
evolved the concept of precautionary principle, state must anticipate and protect the
environment-onus of proof on the industrialist to show that no harm.
• MC Mehta vs UOI (Taj Mahal Case): Factories and industries near Taj, leading to
yellowing, court held that state should take precaution.
POLLUTER PAYS
• Indian Council for Enviro-legal action: Chemical industries polluting environment-
court held that polluter will pay-awarded fine of 38 crores.
• Jagannath vs UOI: aqua culture in Chilika polluting river and harming wild life-
court asked the person to compensate villagers.
PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE
• Panchayat vs Coca Cola: Factory leading to water pollution-court held that the state
is the trustee of these resources.
ABSOLUTE LIABILITY
• MC MEHTA vs UOI (Oleum Gas Leak): Leak in Shriram fertiliser, state evolved
that if dangerous activity-the owner has no fault liability-without any exceptions.
ECOCENTRIC APPROACH
• Radhakrishnan Godavaram vs UOI: State should shift from anthropocentric to
ecocentric.
NUISANCE AND LAW
• Free Legal Aid Cell vs Delhi: Firecrackers and Loud speakers affecting public health
CRIMINAL LAW AND ENVIRONMENT
• Municipal Corporation Ratlam case: The corporation had the responsibility to
clean the city-section 133 CRPC is not in conflict with water and Air acts as it
provides faster remedy.
WATER ACT 1974
• MC MEHTA vs UOI (Ganga Pollution case): The Kanpur tanneries polluting
ganga-court held that UP State Pollution Board did nothing to protect
AIR ACT 1981
• MC MEHTA vs UOI (Surajkund Case): Factories near surajkund harming the
resorts by polluting the environment-court asked to stop mining activities.
• Pollution Control Board vs Coke: PCB had asked the industry to set up pollution
control device.
WILDLIFE PROTECTION ACT 1972
• WWF vs UOI: SC Asked government to implement WLPA 1972.
FOREST CONSERVATION ACT 1980
• Godavarman case: If forest used for non forest purpose then compensatory
mechanism- made CAMPA and breached separation of power
NOISE POLLUTION
• Church of gospel truth vs KKR: Noise pollution rules apply to religious activities
also
• Maulana vs West Bengal: Mosque in residential activities affecting peace- article 25
is limited with reasonable restrictions
MISCELLENEOUS
• Hussain vs UOI: Right to potable water is FR under article 21.
• Kshetriya Pradushan Samiti vs UOI: right to healthy environment if a FR under
right to life- person can approach under article 32
• Narmada Bachao andolan vs UOI: The court allowed the increase in height of
sardar sarovar dam as the court has to balance between environmental protection and
development.
