1. Environmental Pollution:Concerns & Judicial Pronouncements
CS Disha Kant
Powerpoint Templates

2. Environment :
"environment" includes water, air and land and the inter- relationship which exists among and between water, air and land, and human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organism and property
The air we breathe,
The water we drink,
And the earth we stand on,
for every second we are in the lap of nature.

3. Pollution :
"environmental pollution" means the presence in the environment of any environmental pollutant;
 "environmental pollutant" means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be, injurious to environment;
Economic prosperity at the cost of disturbing the natural env.
Any single particle that distracts the ecology by its presence to the extent that it renders nothing but harm to humanity, life & nature is env pollution.

4. Basics of Environmental Protection in India :
The UN Conference on Human Environment and Development held at Stockholm and ‘Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment' 1972 
42nd amendment incorporated Article 48A and Article 51A (g) in the Constitution.
Article 48A the states are under the ‘active obligation' that it shall endeavour to protect and impose the environment.
Article 51A (g) -duty to protect and improve the environment. Article 51A (g) is not law and, a fortiori, not supreme law.
 It is considered as magna carta of Environmental law. Stockholm Conference, 1972 also has the impact on the environment related laws. After 1972, India enacted the Water Act 1976, Air Act 1981, Environment Protection Act, 1986, various policies and notification.

5. LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS :
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974  
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981  
Environment Protection Act, 1986
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991,
The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010
Other than these
Rules
policies
Water---provide for the prevention and control of water pollution and maintaining or restoring wholesomeness of water
Air--to provide the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution.
Environment Act provide for the protection and improvement of environment and the prevention of hazards to human beings, other living creatures, plants and property.
Green Tribunal Act, 2010 intend to provide for the establishment of a National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
Public liability has been enacted for providing immediate relief to the persons affected by accidents occurring while handling any hazardous substance and for other incidental and connected matters.

6. What is the need?? RiGhT tO LiFe
the SC has included The right to clean and wholesome environment is now inbuilt constituent of right to life under art 21. oleum & bhopal were accepted under writ jurisdiction. Art 32 /226 can be utilised for legislative intervention. Article 32 of the Constitution gives an extensive original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in regard to enforcement of Fundamental Rights. It is empowered to issue directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari to enforce them.

7. Judicial Trend & Environment
L.K. Koolwal v State of Rajasthan 1988 Rajasthan HC have issued mandamus directing Jaipur Municipal Corporation to clean certain areas of the city. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1985 RLEK approached SC through letter alleging illegal mining of limestone in eco fragile region of Dehradun.SC treated it as writ petition. Right to an unpolluted environment was recognised as integral part of right to life. Court has treated its duty to forbid all actions from upsetting the ecosystem
SC took it as violation of fundamental right. First case invoking issues relating to env pollution and ecological balance.
LkKoolwal v state of Rajasthan AIR 1988
Subhash Kumar vs. State. of Bihar- (1991) 1 SCC 598, the Supreme Court held that right to life is a fundamental right under Art. 21 of the Constitution and it include the right to enjoyment of pollution free water and air for full enjoyment of life. If anything endangers or impairs that quality of life in derogation of laws a citizen has recourse to Art.32 of the Constitution for removing the pollution of water or air which may be detrimental to life

8. DARE TO MESS : SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Is that all. Right to life converges to another aspect i.e sustainable development.
 'sustainable development' was used by the Brundtland Commission which coined what has become the most often-quoted definition of sustainable development as development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.“
Universe is one of the rarest gift that the nature has given to the human being. Even after prolonged experiments the scientist could not establish, that human can survive in any other planet except earth.
Therefore important that the ‘environment of which land, water, air, human beings, plants and animals are the components, be preserved and protected from degradation to enable maintenance of the ecological balance.
Therefore humanity must live within the carrying capacity of the earth. It is essential for the people who live now to use the resources of earth sustainably and prudently so that they do not deny certain benefits to future generations.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 8

9. Violating the Sustainable Development
Industrial Accident is one of the major causes of violation of Rule of sustainable development.
Who is liable?

10. Corporate Environmental liability
No Fault liability Or
Rule of Rylands v Fletcher
Liability without any fault, to the situations when a person may be liable for some harm even though he is not negligent in causing the same, or there is unintentional harm, or sometimes he may have made some positive efforts to prevent the same, liability in such situation rests on a person engaging in an ultra hazardous activity from which injury to others is likely to result, notwithstanding his reasonable care should pay for the damage..This is the Rule of strict liability or the Rule of Rylands v Fletcher.
However, this rule applies only to non-natural user of land and is subject to some exceptions.
Act of god
Plaintiff own default
Act of third party
Statutory liability

11. Oleum Gas leak Case
M.C. Mehta and Another v. Union of India and others.
On the question of liability of an enterprise engaged in hazardous activities, that an enterprise which is engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and an industry which poses a potential threat to the health and safety of the persons working in the factory and of those residing in the surrounding area owes an absolute and non-delegatable duty to the community to ensure that no harm results to any one on account of an hazardous or inherently dangerous nature of the activity which it has undertaken.
SC took a bold initiative and evolved the concept of ‘Absolute Liability’

12. “Polluters Pay” and “Precautionary Principle”:
Indian Council for Enviro - Legal Action v. Union of India,
"The Polluter Pays" principle
"Once the activity carried on is hazardous or inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such activity is liable to make good the loss caused to any other person by his activity irrespective of the fact whether he took reasonable care while carrying on his activity. The rule is premised upon the very nature of the activity carried on".
The "Polluter Pays" principle as interpreted by the Court means that the absolute liability for harm to the environment extends not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the environmental degradation.
Consequently the polluting industries are "absolutely liable to compensate for the harm caused by them to villagers in the affected area, to the soil and to the underground water and hence, they are bound to take all necessary measures to remove sludge and other pollutants lying in the affected areas".
Remediation of the damaged environment is part of the process of "Sustainable Development" and as such polluter is liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as well as the cost of reversing the damaged ecology. 1996

13. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v Union of India
"The Precautionary principle”
In simple terms mean environmental measures to anticipate, prevent the causes of environmental degradation“.
In these two cases court has accepted that the "Polluter Pays" principle and the Precautionary principle are essential features of “Sustainable Development”

14. Opportunity Lost BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY
Due to the accident, many people suffered from various diseases and disorders even till many years later. The worst part is that people living near the premises of the site still continue to suffer. BGT was a industrial catastrophe that occurred in 1984 in Union Carbide India limited pesticide plant in MP.
It occurred on the night of December 2–3, 1984 at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant inBhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. A leak of methyl isocyanate gas and other chemicals from the plant resulted in the exposure of hundreds of thousands of people. The toxic substance made its way in and around the shantytowns located near the plant.
Union of india 1986
SC seeing mass suffering moved into directing immediate relief
Feb terminated all civil and criminal proceedings agianst ucc for a compensation of US $ 470 million.it wsa later accepted by SC termination was on letter of recommendation by GOI.
BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY

15. Liability:
UCIL was the Indian subsidiary of Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), with Indian Government controlled banks and the Indian public holding a 49.1 percent stake.  the Supreme Court of India allowed UCC to sell its 50.9 percent share. Union Carbide sold UCIL, the Bhopal plant operator, to Eveready Industries India Limited in The Bhopal plant was later sold to McLeod Russel (India) Ltd. Dow Chemical Company purchased UCC in 2001.
Warren Anderson, UCC CEO at the time of the disaster.[7][8] In June 2010, seven ex-employees, including the former UCIL chairman, were convicted in Bhopal of causing death by negligence and sentenced to two years imprisonment and a fine of about $2,000 each, the maximum punishment allowed by law.
SC revived Criminlaliability CBI chargesheeted Under IPC for Culpaable homicideagainst UCC UCIl, UCC chief thenand others
In 2005 Jan CJM of Bhopal courrt issued letter to US Deptt to serve summons to DOW Chemicals owner of UCC.

16. Liability Established:
In 2010, these were found guilty & convicted
Non-Executive Chairman
Managing Director
Vice president
Manager
Production manager
Production assistant

17. Public Liability Insurance
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991,
Liability to give Relief
Imposes no fault liability on the owner to give relief in case of death or injury to any person or damage to any property, resulting from an accident occuring while handling any hazardous substance..
Compulsory Insurance requires owner to take out one or more insurance policies, before starting the handling of hazardous substance.  Such insurance policy should provide for contract of insurance, whereby he is insured against liability to give relief under Section 3(1) of the Act. The amount of insurance policy should not be less than the amount of paid up capital of the undertaking handling any hazardous substance and more than the amount, not exceeding rupees fifty crore, as may be prescribed.
has been enacted for providing immediate relief to the persons affected by accidents occurring while handling any hazardous substance and for other incidental and connected matters.
For the purposes of Section 3, injury includes permanent total or permanent partial disability or sickness resulting out of an accident

18. Green Tribunal
The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 National Green Tribunal to Settle Dispute of questions arises out of the implementation of the enactments specified in following enactments:
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974;
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977;
The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980;
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981;
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986;
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
 The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 
ntend to provide for the establishment of a National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

19. Thank You
Disclaimer Clause: Views expressed in this presentation views of the author do not necessary reflect those of the Institute.