HANUMAN LAXMAN AROSKAR versus UNION OF INDIA

Citation: [2019] 5 S.C.R. 916 · Decided: 29-03-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 10 judgment(s) · cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
916
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019]  5 S.C.R.
HANUMAN LAXMAN AROSKAR
v.
UNION OF INDIA
(Civil Appeal No. 12251 of 2018)
MARCH 29, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.]
Environmental Law:
Environmental clearance (EC) – Grant of – For development
of airport in Goa – Challenged before National Green Tribunal
(NGT) – NGT affirmed the EC holding that the project did not
compromise with the environment and concluded that further
safeguards for environmental protection needed to be incorporated
– On appeal, held: Rule of law requires a regime which has effective,
accountable and transparent institutions – Responsive, inclusive,
participatory and representative decision making are key ingredients
to the rule of law – Public access to information is fundamental to
the preservation of rule of law – Environmental governance that is
founded on the rule of law emerges from the value of the Constitution
– Health of environment is key to preserving the right to life as a
constitutionally recognized value under Art.21 – Proper structures
for environmental decision-making find expression in the guarantee
against arbitrary action and the affirmative duty of fair treatment
u/Art. 14 of the Constitution – In the area of environmental
governance, the process of decision-making are as crucial as the
ultimate decision – The basic postulate of 2006 Notification was
that the path which was prescribed for disclosures, studies, gathering
data, consultation and appraisal was designed in a manner that
would secure a transparent, responsive and inclusive decision-
making – In the present case there was failure to follow binding
norms under the 2006 Notification – There were serious flaws in
decision-making process – Relevant material was excluded from
consideration and extraneous circumstances were borne in mind –
EAC as an expert body abdicated its obligations to make an expert
determination based on reasons – NGT as an adjudicatory body
[2019] 5 S.C.R. 916
916
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
917
failed to exercise the jurisdiction entrusted to it u/s. 16(h) r/w. s. 20
of NGT Act by merely deferring to the decision to recommend and
grant an EC – However, the need for setting up a new airport is a
matter of policy – In order to bring about a wholesome balance
between the development of infrastructure and preservation of
environment, in exercise of jurisdiction of Art. 142 of Constitution,
EAC is directed to revisit the conditions subject of which it had
granted EC, in a time bound manner – Constitution of India – Arts.
14, 21, 51A(g) and 142 – National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 –
ss. 16(h) and 20.
Government of India approved setting up of an airport in
Goa in the year 2000. Ministry of Environment and Forests of
Government of India issued Notification in 2006, mandating prior
Environmental Clearance (EC). In 2011 State of Goa as the project
proponent submitted Form 1 as stipulated in 2006 Notification.
In 2015 Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) which was
constituted under 2006 Notification recommended the grant of
an EC for the project and the Ministry concerned approved grant
of EC. Grant of EC was challenged by the appellants before the
National Green Tribunal (NGT). NGT upheld the EC and imposed
additional conditions to safeguard the environment. Hence, the
present appeals.
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act
1976, which came into force with effect from 3 January 1977,
inserted Article 48A to the Constitution which mandates that the
State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and
safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Article 51A(g)
of the Constitution places a corresponding duty on every citizen
to protect and improve the natural environment including forests,
lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living
creatures. Following the decisions taken at the United Nations
Conference on the Human Environment held at Stockholm in June
1972 in which India participated, Parliament enacted the
Environment Protection Act 1986 to protect and improve the
environment and prevent hazards to human beings, other living
creatures, plants and property. [Para 32][951-A-C]
HANUMAN LAXMAN AROSKAR  v. UNION OF INDIA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
918
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019]  5 S.C.R.
2. The MoEF, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
section (1) and clause (v) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the
1986 Act read with clause (d) of sub-rule 3 of rule 5 of th

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.