1
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Paper No. : 04 Civil and Political Rights
Module : 02 International Instruments on Freedom of Religion
Paper No. : 9 National Mechanisms for Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights Module : 4 PIL – Environment I
Content Writer
2
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Table of Contents
1. Learning Outcomes
2. Introduction: Environmental Protection and Human Rights
3. Constitutional and Legal Provisions dealing with Protection of Environment Description of Module
Subject Name Human Rights and Duties
Paper Name National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights Module
Name/Title
Public Interest Litigation and Environment Protection
Module Id 4
Pre-requisites Objectives Keywords
3
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
3.1 Legislations dealing with the Protection of Environment
4. Judicial Contributions to Protection of Environment
4.1 Extension of Scope of Locus Standi in Environment cases 4.2: Right of the people to live in healthy environment
4.3 Right to health and medical care
4.4 Right to access to drinking water 4.5 Water Pollution
4.6 Taj Mahal Case 4.7 Silent Valley Case 4.8 Coastal Protection Case 4.9 Dehradun Valley Case 4.10 Smoking in Public Places
4.11 Pollution in Delhi
4.12 Sri Ram Food and Fertilizer Case (Oleum leak case) 4.13 Public Health
4.14 Public Park 4.15 Bhopal Gas Case
5. Key doctrines evolved in environmental litigation
5.1 The “Precautionary Principle”
5.2 “Polluter pays Principle”
4
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
5.3 The principles of Strict and Absolute liability 5.4 Principle of sustainable development 5.5 Public Trust Doctrine
6. Concluding Remarks
1. Learning Outcomes
To give students an overview of the role played by the various courts in the protection of enviroment and human rights.
By the end of the module, students will have an understanding of the role of public interest litigation in the developing of enviroment jurisprudence in India.
5
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
2. Introduction: Environmental Protection and Human Rights
Source: http://butterfly-insect.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/which-earth-do-you-want- live-in.jpg
The public interest litigation’s province has become very wide. Under Article 321, the Supreme Court has expanded the prospects and interfered whenever injustice is caused or being caused by State action or by lack of it. It has tried to help the poor, hopeless and helpless people who have no means to approach the Supreme Court or who don’t know whom to approach.2 Public Interest Litigation has today become an axiom for judicial involvement in social, political and economic affairs of the Indian society and State. The province of public interest litigation has extended so much that
1 Constitution of India, 1950
2 Dr. Krushna Chandra Dalai, GRA - GLOBAL RESEARCH ANALYSIS, Volume : 2 | Issue : 2 | Feb 2013, ISSN No 2277 – 8160,
http://theglobaljournals.com/gra/file.php?val=February_2013_1360851435_47080_48.pdf
6
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
every injury to every grievance can be brought under it.3 The protection and improvement of human environment is one of the major areas of concern for PIL.
A clean and healthy environment is a fundamental need of the existence of life. The ecological imbalance contributes to the environmental hazards like acid rains, noise pollution, air pollution, water pollution. The depletion of ozone layer causes skin cancer, cataracts, damage to body’s immunity system, mutation, loss of productivity. Environmental law is an instrument to protect and improve the environment and to control or prevent any acts or omissions likely to pollute the environment. Therefore there are hundreds of environmental laws in India, directly or indirectly dealing with the subject of environment.
3. Constitutional and Legal Provisions dealing with Protection of Environment:
Source: http://sfgov2.org/Modules/ShowImage.aspx?imageid=9810
3 Dr. Krushna Chandra Dalai, GRA - GLOBAL RESEARCH ANALYSIS, Volume : 2 | Issue : 2 | Feb 2013, ISSN No 2277 – 8160,
http://theglobaljournals.com/gra/file.php?val=February_2013_1360851435_47080_48.pdf
7
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Stockholm Declaration of 1972 was one of the major attempts to conserve and protect the human environment at the international level. As a result of this Declaration, the States were required to adopt legislative measures to protect and improve the environment. Accordingly, Indian Parliament inserted two Articles, i.e. 48A and 51A in the Constitution of India in 1976.4 Article 48A of the Constitution directs that the ‘State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests and wildlife of the country’. Similarly, clause (g) of Article 51A imposes a duty on
‘every citizen of India, to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, river, and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures’. The collective effect of Articles 48A and 51A (g) imply that the 'State' as well as the 'citizens' both are now under constitutional obligation to conserve, preserve, protect and improve the environment. Every generation owes a duty to all succeeding generations to develop and conserve the natural resources of the nation in the best possible way. It is to be noted that these provisions, though not enforceable in court of law, direct the state to enact legislations and frame policies towards the promotion and protection of Environment.
Thus the state is under a moral duty to take measures to prevent ecological imbalances resulting from modern industrialization. The Constitution has also cast a duty on the citizen to take steps for maintaining ecological balance.
Besides these, Sections 227 and 278 of Indian Penal Code and sections 133 and 134 of the code of Criminal Procedure are some other provisions, which contain mandate to protect and improve the environment.
3.1 Legislations dealing with the Protection of Environment5
4 V.K. AGARWAL, Environmental Laws in India: Challenges for Enforcement, Bulletin of the National Institute of Ecology 15: 227-238, 2005 Gupta et al. (Editors): Ecology and Environmental Management: Issues and Research Need; See Armin Rosencranz, Shyam Divan and Martha L.Noble, Environmental Law and Policy in India (1991)
5 Dr. Minal H. Upadhyay, P.I.L. and Environment Protection, Vol. 2, Issue: 3, March2014 (IJRSML) ISSN: 2321 – 2853, http://raijmr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/1_1-7-Dr.-Minal-H.-Upadhyay.pdf;
http://isebindia.com/95_99/99-01-1.html
8
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
In addition to the constitutional mandate to protect and improve the environment, there are a plenty of legislations on the subject. Some of the relevant legislations are:
1. The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974;
2. The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977;
3. The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981;
4. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986;
5. Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991;
6. The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995 and
7. The National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997;
8. The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972;
9. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
4 Judicial Contributions to Protection of Environment
9
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Source: http://www.condenaststore.com/-sp/Something-s-just-not-right-our-air-is-clean-our-water- is-pure-we-all-ge-Prints_i8545559_.htm
The Apex judiciary in India has been indicating its commitment for the protection of environment from time to time and it has given prime importance to the environmental promotion and protection through various judgments. The expansive and creative judicial interpretation of the word “life” in Article 21 has led to the constructive development of environmental jurisprudence in India. The “Right to Life” is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 and since the Right to Life connotes
“quality of life”, a person has a right to the enjoyment of pollution free water and air to enjoy life fully. The judiciary has recognized “Right to a clean and wholesome environment” and the “Right to clean air and water” under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Fundamental Right to life and Personal Liberty has become a sanctuary of human values for more environmental protection.
The Supreme Court has played a key role in filling the gap between the legislation and its implementation by constructive interpretation of environment law. Most of the actions in the environmental cases are brought under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution. The environmental litigations are generally based on the notions of violation of Fundamental Rights.
It is to be noted that the higher judiciary has always endeavoured to strike a balance between conservation of environment on one hand and the economic development on the other hand. Due to this reason, the judiciary has given guidelines to safeguard the society against the ill effects of industrialization.
10
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
4.1: Extension of Scope of Locus Standi in Environment cases:
Source: http://ehumanrights.org/ourwork_environment_Copenhagen.html
The traditional rule of "Locus Standi" states “a person, whose right is infringed alone can file a petition. In Ratlam Municipality vs. Vardhichand6, the Supreme Court expanded the principle of
“Locus Standi” in environmental cases and observed that environment related issues must be considered in a different perspective. In this case, the Court directed the Ratlam Municipality to provide sanitation and drainage despite the budgetary constraints, there by enabling the “poor to live with dignity”.
This development in judicial delivery system is considered as a silent “legal revolution”. It has hurled constraints posed by the technical rules of procedure and paved a path for litigation from public-spirited persons. The Court not only complemented petitioners who filed environment protection litigation but also awarded money to the petitioners.
4.2: Right of the people to live in healthy environment
6 AIR 1980 SC 1623
11
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Source: http://plastic-pollution.org/The Indian Constitution is one of the unique constitutions of the world. In India the concern for environment protection has not only been raised to the status of fundamental law of the land, but it is also wedded with the human rights of every individual to live in pollution free environment with full human dignity. The Constitution of India obligates the “State” as well as “citizens” to “protect”
and “Improve” the environment.7
The Supreme Court gave an expansive meaning to right to environment in Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun vs. State of UP8. The representatives of the rural litigation and entitlement Kendra, Dehradun wrote a letter to the Supreme Court alleging that illegal limestone quarries in the Mussore –Dehradun region was devastating the fragile ecosystem in the area. The court treated the letter as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. In the instant case the court presupposes the violation of Fundamental Right. The court ordered the closure of certain lime stone quarries on the ground as that there were serious deficiencies regarding safety and hazards in them. The court stated “the right of the people to live in healthy environment with minimum disturbance of ecological balance and without avoidable hazard to them and to their cattle, house and agriculture, land and pollution of air, water and environment”.
7 http://dl.sjp.ac.lk/dspace/bitstream/123456789/960/1/Environmental%20Justice.pdf
8 (1986 ) 2 SCC 431
12
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
In Govind Singh vs. Shanthi Swarup9, the Supreme Court has taken microscopic view on the contours of the law of public nuisance. In the instant case the Supreme Court held that the effect of running bakery was injurious to the people, as it was polluting the environment by emitting smoke from chimney and ordered the closure of Bakery. The court said that “in a matter of this nature what is involved is not merely the right of a private individual but the health, safety and convenience of the public at large”.
In T.N Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India10, the Supreme Court imposed a fine of Rs.1 crore on the Government of Himachal Pradesh for neglecting the ecology by allowing the companies to paint advertisements on eco-fragile rock faces on both sides of Rohtag-Manali road.
The court said that the amount would be a part of Rs. 5 crores corpus to be created from the money to be levied on the delinquent companies. The court directed to use the money for restoring the ecology distributed by the painting of advertisements on the rock faces done by MBD Books, Coca Cola, Pepsi and Birla whites.
4.3 Right to health and medical care
Source http://ehumanrights.org/ourwork_environment_Copenhagen.html
9 AIR 1979 SC 143
10 (1997) 2 SCC 267
13
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
In Consumer Education and Research Centre vs. Union of India11 the Supreme Court has delivered a historic judgment and held that the right to health and medical care is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution, as it is essential for making the life of the workmen meaningful and purposeful with dignity of persons.
4.4 Right to access to drinking water
Source: http://operationcleanwater.weebly.com/
It is pertinent to mention that the right to access to drinking water is fundamental to life and there is a duty on the State under Article 21 to provide clean Drinking Water to its Citizens. In APPCB vs. M.V. Naidu12, the court ruled “Drinking water is of Primary importance in any country. In fact
11 (1995) 3 SCC 42
12 2001 (2) SCC 62.
14
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
India is a partly to the resolution of the UNO passed during the United Nations water conference in 1977 as “All people”, whatever their stage of development and their social and economic conditions, have the right to have access to drinking water in quantum and of quality equal to their basic needs”.
The court observed “water is the basic need for the survival of human beings and is part of the Right to Life and Human Rights as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
4.5 Water Pollution:
Source: http://www.ecouterre.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/water-pollution-china-2- 537x402.jpg
In M.C Mehta v. Union of India13, which is known as Ganga Water pollution case, the Supreme Court considered the problem of pollution of Ganga water by the affluent discharge from the tanneries. The Supreme Court directed the owners of the tanneries to establish the primary treatment plants so as to prevent the pollution of the Ganga Water being used by large number of people of the country. The polluted water affects the health and life of the people. The court observed that the financial capacity of the tanneries should be considered as irrelevant while requiring them to establish the treatment plants. At last it is resulted in the closure of tanneries, which were polluting holy river Ganga.
In Mukti Sangarsha Movement v. State of Maharashtra., sought to prevent reckless exploitation of river running through some parts of Maharashtra which, was adversely affecting its bed due to reckless quarrying of its sand.
In F.K Hussain V. Union of India14, sought to prevent lowering of underground water level on account of its reckless withdrawal by electric pumps. This case was also referred by Kerala High Court
13 1988 AIR 1115, 1988 SCR (2) 530
14 A.I.R. l990 Ker. 321
15
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
in this point to be noted that the right to sweet water and right to free air are attributes of the right to life, for, those are basic elements which sustain life itself.
In Goa Foundation V/s The Konkan Railway Corporation15 In this case the Bombay High Court held that development was not possible without some adverse effect on the environment and ecology. The project of public utility cannot be abandoned if there are some adverse effects.
Therefore it is equally important to adjust the interest of the people and to maintain the environment. Development is necessary because without it there will not be any progress, but must also be in close harmony with the environment. If the development is intended to achieve without taking into consideration the environment and the ecosystem, there will be total devastation.
4.6 Taj Mahal Case16
Source: http://cpcb.nic.in/otheruseful_information_agra.php, The Administration Division of the Taj Trapezium Zone
15 AIR 1992 BOM 471
16 M.C.Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 734; see also M.C.Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1999 S.C. 3192
16
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
The writ petition filed by M. C. Mehta V/s Union of India was popularly known as “Taj Mahal Case”. In this case the Sulphur dioxide emitted by the Mathura Refineries and Industries was causing atmospheric pollution. Due to which Taj Mahal, a monument of international fame and repute was being affected. It was therefore contended by the petitioner that preventive steps should taken to save the degradation of Taj Mahal. The Supreme Court observed that the Taj Mahal is the cultural heritage of India and it is also a source of revenue for the country as millions of tourists visit it every year. The Court adopted the path of Sustainable Development. The Court issued directions that coal and coke based industries in Taj Trapezium Zone (“TTZ”) which were damaging Taj should either change over to natural gas or to be relocated outside TTZ to the alternate site provided under Agra Master Plan.
The Supreme Court also directed to protect the plants planted around Taj as mentioned under:
“The Divisional Forest Officer, Agra is directed to take immediate steps for seeing that water is supplied to the plants... The Union Government is directed to release the funds immediately without waiting for receipt of the proposal from the U.P. Government on the basis of the copy of the report.
Funding may be subsequently settled with the U.P. Government, but in any set of circumstances for want of funds the officer is directed to see that plants do not wither away.”
17
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Source: http://mic.com/articles/86975/15-famous-landmarks-zoomed-out-tell-a-bigger-story 4.7 Silent Valley Case17
In Kerala, Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) led the campaign against the “Silent Valley Project”. The PIL was filed against the Government to stop the execution of the project. The purpose of filing this PIL was to pressure and exert influence on the Government to initiate the development project after making proper “Environment Impact Assessment”.
Silent Valley Movement in Kerala is an example of people’s response to ecological problem and to work as a pressure group in the field of environment protection. The freedom of speech and expression by the Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad, which is the Non-Governmental Organization,
17 Society for Protection of Silent Valley v. Union of India and others, 1980 Kerala HC; where the Court refused to second-guess the State government’s position relating to the environmental impact of a hydel-power project. The judgment mentions that the project was unanimously supported by the legislature of Kerala and it would be improper for the judiciary to interfere. However, this led to an agitation and subsequently there was a re-think on the viability of the project.
18
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
coupled with the help of Influential environmentalist within and outside the Government and the powerful assistance of media compelled the Government to abandon the “Silent Valley Project”.18
Source: A remarkable people’s movement stopped a hydroelectric project across the Kunthipuzha River and saved a pristine evergreen forest in Kerala,
http://www.conservationindia.org/case-studies/silent-valley-%E2%80%93-a-people%E2%80%99s- movement-that-saved-a-forest
4.8 Coastal Protection Case19
18 V.K. AGARWAL, Environmental Laws in India: Challenges for Enforcement, Bulletin of the National Institute of Ecology 15: 227-238, 2005 Gupta et al. (Editors): Ecology and Environmental Management: Issues and Research Need; D.P. Shrivastava Memorial Lecture -‘The role of the judiciary in environmental protection’ by Hon’ble Mr. K.G. Balakrishnan, Chief Justice of India, Venue: High Court of Chattisgarh, Bilaspur – March 20, 2010
19 Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action V/s Union of India
19
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/21693334@N06/2959516969
It is also known as H-Acid Case or Bichri Village Case. The environmentalist organization
“Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action” filed a PIL before the Supreme Court against some chemical industries producing certain hazardous chemicals in an industrial complex at Village Bichhri in Udaypur, State of Rajasthan. The industries had not obtained the necessary license, clearance or consent, from the statutory authorities. They had not installed any equipment for the treatment of highly toxic waste materials discharged from such industries. The highly toxic effluents were sufficient enough to poison the earth, the water and everything that came in contact with the same. The writ petition was filed complaining the above situation.
The Supreme Court requested NEERI, i.e., “National Environmental Engineering Institute” to study the situation pertaining to the effects and consequences of these chemical industries situated at Bichhri Village and put up their report. The report of NEERI revealed that the Respondent did not carry out the order of the Supreme Court fully in the matter of removal of sludge and the Respondent did not even fulfill the undertaking given by them to the Court. The Respondent, without respecting the reports of officials and expert body, continued their illegal course of action leading to contempt for law. The Supreme Court held that the Respondent were responsible for all the damage to the soil, to the underground water and to the village.
The Court’s engagement with these matters has resulted in activating the statutory machinery established under various environment laws. The Court’s activism in this area has, however, also attracted criticism. For instance, when the Court ordered the closure of industries, it neither heard all the industries affected nor their workmen before passing the order. This has resulted in these parties
20
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
approaching the Court with a series of interlocutory applications, taking up an inordinate amount of Court’s time, even while leaving the aggrieved parties dissatisfied.20
4.9 Dehradun Valley Case21
Source: http://minerals.ohiodnr.gov/mining-industry/blasting, A depiction of mine blasting
In that case, carrying haphazard and dangerous limestone quarrying in the Mussorie Hill range of the Himalaya, mines blasting out the hills with dynamite, extracting limestone from thousand of acres had upset the hydrological system of the valley. The Supreme Court ordered the closing of limestone quarrying in the hills and observed that “ this would undoubtedly cause hardship to them, but it is a price that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the people to live in healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance…”
4.10 Smoking in Public Places22
20 RS Pathak, Public Interest Litigation in India, in Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law, Essays in Honour of Nani Palkhivala, Edited by Venkat Iyer (2000)
21 Rural Litigation & Entitlement Kendra v. Slate of U.P., AIR 1985 SC 652; see also AIR 1988 SC 2187
22 Murli S.. Deora v. Union of India (2001) 3 SCC 765
21
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Source: https://maneleen.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/banning-smoking-in-public-places-and- workplaces/
In 2001, the Supreme Court of India imposed ban on smoking of tobacco in public places all over the country. Smoking causes harm not only to the smokers but also to non-smokers who are forced to inhale the second hand smoke.
More than 3 million people die every year in India as a result of smoking tobacco including bidis and cigarettes. One lakh Indians get lung cancer every year because of smoking. Indeed, lung cancer kills 95% of its victims. That is why the apex Court ruling has immense social value. But no one cares for the ban. As you know the cigarettes and bidis are openly sold in tobacco-free railway stations, bus stands, cinema houses, etc. The statutory warning 'smoking is injurious to health' is
22
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
printed in such small prints and colour that hardly it is readable. Even, if it is readable, it has not served any purpose. So it is the social awakening which can only help us to prevent smoking.23
4.11 Pollution in Delhi
Source: http://www.tropical-rainforest-animals.com/air-pollution-causes.html
In Almitra H.Patel v. Union of India24 the Supreme Court reiterated the observations made in that Delhi is one of the most polluted cities to the residents of Delhi. The ambient air is so much polluted that it is difficult to breathe. More and more Delhites are suffering from respiratory diseases and throat infections. River Yamuna- the main source of drinking water supply- is the free dumping place for untreated sewerage and industrial waste. Apart from air and water pollution, the city is virtually an open dustbin. Garbage strewn all over Delhi is a common sight. The Court directed the authorities to take immediate necessary steps to control pollution and protect the environment.
4.12 Sri Ram Food and Fertilizer Case25 (Oleum leak case)
In that case, a major leakage of Oleum Gas affected a large number of persons, both amongst the workmen and public. The Supreme Court held that where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm results to any one on account of an accident in the operation of such hazardous and inherently dangerous activity resulting in the escape of toxic gas the
23 V.K. AGARWAL, Environmental Laws in India: Challenges for Enforcement, Bulletin of the National Institute of Ecology 15: 227-238, 2005 Gupta et al. (Editors): Ecology and Environmental Management: Issues and Research Need
24 AIR 2000 SC 1256; Dr. B.L Wadehra v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2969
25 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086
23
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such a liability is not subject to any exceptions in the world.
4.13 Public Health
The Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of preservation of public health. In Subba Rao v. State of Himachal Pradesh26, the Supreme Court ordered the closure of a bone factory, which was polluting the environment by its pungent smell and making the life of the people miserable. No one can do business at the cost of public health. In Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand &
Others27, the Supreme Court held that the grievous failure of local authorities to provide the basic amenity of public conveniences drives the miserable slum-dwellers to ease in the streets, on the sly for a time, and openly thereafter, because under nature's pressure, bashfulness becomes a luxury and dignity a difficult art. Responsible Municipal Council constituted for the purpose of preserving public health cannot run away from its duty by pleading financial inability.
4.14 Public Park
A place, which is reserved for Public Park, cannot be converted for use into a private nursing home. In Banglore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa28, the Supreme Court set aside the decision of the Banglore Development Authority granting permission for converting the place reserved for public- park for the establishment of a nursing home and observed thus: “The public interest on reservation and preservation of open spaces for parks and playgrounds cannot be sacrificed by leasing or selling such sites to private persons for conversion to some other use.”
4.15 Bhopal Gas Case29
26 AIR 1989 SC 171
27 AIR 1980 SC 1622
28 AIR 1991 SC 1902.; http://dl4a.org/uploads/pdf/environmental%20law.pdf
29 Union Carbide Corporation V/s Union of India (AIR 1990 SC 273) Charan Lal Sahu V/s Union of India (AIR 1990 SC 1480)
24
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Source: http://www.livemint.com/Politics/NtYcWmazGAis6CEpj4yAkP/Industrial-disasters-Is-India- better-prepared-than-it-was-i.html, The Union Carbide plant in Bhopal.
Bhopal Gas Leak was one of the most tragic industrial disasters of the past few centuries. On December 3, 1984 just after midnight, 40 tons of highly toxic methyl isocynate (MIC), which had been manufactured and stored in Union Carbide’s Chemical Plant in Bhopal, escaped into the atmosphere and killed over 3,500 people and as many as 2,00,000 others were injured – many seriously, some permanently.30
In April 1985, for early and effective settlement of claims arising out of the disaster, the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act was enacted which conferred an exclusive right to the Indian Government to represent all claimants both within and outside India, and directed the Government to organize a plan for the registration and processing of victim’s claims.31 Then the Indian Government sued Union Carbide in the US. The US court declined to try suit on the ground that
30 Clouds of injustice, Bhopal disaster 20 years on, Amnesty International Publications 2004 ISBN: 0- 86210-364-9, http://www.amnesty.ch/de/themen/wirtschaft-menschenrechte/bhopal/dok/2009/25- jahre-bhopal/clouds_of_injustice_2004.pdf
31 Clouds of injustice, Bhopal disaster 20 years on, Amnesty International Publications 2004 ISBN: 0- 86210-364-9, http://www.amnesty.ch/de/themen/wirtschaft-menschenrechte/bhopal/dok/2009/25- jahre-bhopal/clouds_of_injustice_2004.pdf
25
Human Rights and Duties
National Mechanisms for the Protection and Enforcement of Human Rights
PIL – Environment I
Indian Courts were the more appropriate forum. Consequently, in September 1986, the Indian Government sued Union Carbide in the Court of the District Judge, Bhopal for Rs. 3,900 crores on the basis of “more than a prima facie case having been made out” against Union Carbide.
Then, Union Carbide claimed the Supreme Court’s judgment was unsustainable because it amounted to a verdict without trial. The Indian Government also appealed before the Supreme Court because the High Court had reduced interim payment award Rs. 350 crores granted by District Judge, Bhopal by 30 per cent.
The Supreme Court secured a compromise between the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) and the Government of India. Under the settlement UCC agreed to pay US $470 million in full and final settlement of all past, present and future claims arising out of Bhopal Disaster. In addition to facilitate the settlement, the Supreme Court exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction and terminated all the civil, criminal and contempt of Court proceedings that had arisen out of the Bhopal Disaster.
The Supreme Court in its order of 4th May 1989, set forth the reasons for urging the settlement. The Court stated that in view of the enormity of human suffering occasioned by the Bhopal Gas Disaster, there was a pressing urgency to provide immediate and substantial relief to the victims.
In December 1989, the Supreme Court in the Charan Lal Sahu case upheld the Constitutional validity of the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985. Under the said Act, the Indian Government reserved for itself the exclusive right to represent all Bhopal victims in civil litigations against Union Carbide Corporation. In this case the Supreme Court declared that “to do a great right”, it is permissible “to do a little wrong”.
Regarding this case, noted academic Upendra Baxi has observed that the Bhopal Gas Leak involved two disasters, one being the huge loss of life and secondly the absence of a clear legal framework to bring relief to those affected by the same.
Summary:
In this module we looked into constitutional and legal provisions dealing with the protection of the environment. We also looked into legislations dealing with the protection of environment, the judicial contributions to the protection of environment and the right of people to a safe and clean environment with reference to respective case laws.
