M.C. MEHTA ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] 1 S.C.R. 20 · Decided: 07-01-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. VERMA, B.N. KIRPAL, V.N. KHARE
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
M.C. MEHTA ETC. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
JANUARY 7, 1998 
B 
[J. S. VERMA, CJI. B. N. KIRPAL AND V. N. KHARE, JJ.] 
Environment Protection Act, I 986 : 
S. 3 (1) and S. 3 (3)-National Capital Region-Environmental 
C Pollution-Constitution of Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) 
Authority (headed by Shri Bhure Lal) by Government of India-Approval by 
this Court-Government of India permitted to supersede the earlier Notification. 
constituting the ad hoc Authority headed by Mr. Justice R. K.Shukla pursuant 
to Order dated 13.9.1996 passed by this Court-Work pending with the said 
D ad hoc Authority shall automatically stand transferred to Authority headed 
by Shri Bhure Lal. 
E 
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (C) No. 13029of1985 Etc. 
·(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India). 
. 
Ashok H. Desai, Attorney General, M.S. Usgaonkar, Additional Solicitor 
General, H.N. Salve, G.L. Sanghi, Mukul Mudgal, A.D.N. Rao, Wasiin A. Qadri, 
Ms. Niranjana ·Singh, P. Parameshwaran, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Ms. Indra 
Sawhney, Ms. Anubha Jain, Shri Narain, Sandeep Narain, Anis Ahmed Khan, 
Hardeep Singh Anand, S.N. Sikka, (Vijay Panwani) for CPCB., Ranjit Kumar, 
F Kailash Vasdev, Salman Khurshid, R.K. Khanna, Vineet Kumar, Ejaz Maqbool, 
R. Sasiprabhu, Manish Garg, Anees Ahmed, R.K. Gupta, K.K. Gupta, R.K. 
Maheshwari, Ashok Mathur, V.B. Saharya, Ejaz Maqbool, Satish Aggarwal, 
A.A. Khan, L.K. Pandey, S.B. Upadhyay, S.R. Setia, Sanjay Parikh, D.K. Garg 
and D.S. Mehra, for the appearing parties. 
G 
M.C. Mehta, in-person for the Petitioner. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Learned Attorney General has shown to us the draft of the order 
proposed to be made by the Government of India, Mfo.istry of Environment 
H and Forests in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections I and 3 of 
20 
M.C. MEHTA v. U.O.I. 
21 
Section 3 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 constituting an Authority A 
-
--<. 
to be known as the Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority 
for the National Capital Region consisting of the persons, namely, (!) Shri 
Bhure Lal; (2) Shri D.K. Biswas, Chairman- Central Pollution Control Board; 
(3) Shri Anil Aggarwal; (4) Shri Jagdish Khattar: and; (5) Smt. Kiran Dhingra 
and to invest the Authority with the powers and functions sp_ecified therein. B 
We are satisfied that this step being taken by the Government is appropriate 
y 
and timely. We wotild,. however, like to add that except for the Chairnian. 
Central Pollution Control Board being an ex-officio Member of the Authority, 
the remaining four persons named above are to be in the Committee not 
merely by virtue of their office but because of the personal qualifications on 
account of which they are included in the Committee. The learned Attorney c 
General states that the order had not been formerly been made so far 
constituting the Authority because it was considered appropriate that the 
draft be placed before the Court before the order was finally made. He 
informed us that in view of the approval of the same by the Court, the order 
would now be made promptly and the said Authority constituted soon. 
D 
~ 
In view of the constitution of the Authority as above, to deal with the 
entire matter relating to environmental pollution, the question for our 
consideration now is whether the direction given earlier by this Court for 
constitution of an Authority under Section 3(3) of the Act by the order dated 
13th September, 1996 in IA No. 18 in Writ Petition (C) No. 4677of1985 is E 
required to continue. It is clear that the said order dated 13th September, 1996 
had been made because of the absence of any such Authority as is now 
being constituted in the manner· aforesaid. For this reason, the direction to 
constitute an Authority which was complied by constitution of a Committee 
headed by Mr. Justice R.K. Shukla, a former judge of the Allahabad High 
Court, was merely an ad-hoc arrangement to continue till the constitution of F 
-I-
a regular committee as is now being done. It is also necessary to take note 
~· 
of the fact that the constitution of a Committee as above with the 
' 
comprehensive authority to deal with the entire matter relating to environmental 
pollution in the National Capital Region the continuance of any other Authority 
with concurrent jurisdiction in any area within the entire sphere of G 
" 
environmental pollution in the National Capital Region is bound to create an 
emba
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.