LexM.C.MEHTA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
~ - --- M.C.MEHTA A v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. DECEMBER 30, 1996 [KULDIP SINGH AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.] B Environmental Law: Constitution of India, 1950: Ecology-/'ublic Interest Litigation-Alleged that the Taj Mahal, a c monument of international repute, was being degraded due to atmospheric pollution-According to opinion of expert committees including NEER], emissions generated by use of coke/coal by industries in the Taj Trapezium ?one (TTZ) has damaging effect on the Taj and people living in the D TTZ-Held, the 'onus of proof was on industry to show its operation with aid of coke/coal was environmentally benign-The Taj, apart from being a cultural heritage, was industry by itself-Therefore, pollution must be stopped while encouraging development of industry-'Sustainable Development' and 'Precautionary /'rinciple' applicable-industries in TTZ must use natural gas as substitute for coke/coal-If natural gas was not acceptable/available to E such industries, they must stop functioning with aid of coke/coal in the TTZ and may relocate themselves as per directions of Supreme Court-:According- ly, directions issued by Supreme Court-Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986->4.ir (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The petitioner filed a writ petition in public interest in this Court F alleging that the Taj, a monument or international repute, was on its way to degradation due to atmospheric pollution and it was imperative that preventive steps were taken soon. According to the opinion or expert committees including National Environmental Engineering Research In· stitute (NEERI) it was proved beyond doubt that the emissions generated G by the use of coke/coal by the industries in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) were the main polluters of the ambient air and had damaging effect on the Taj and the people living in-the trz. The petitioner had sought appropriate directions to the authorities concerned to take immediate steps to stop air pollution in the TTZ and H 973 974 SUPREME COURT REPORTS[1996] SUPP.10 S.C.R. A save the Taj. ~ Disposing of the petition, this Court HELD : 1.1. The Taj, apart from being a cultural heritage, is an industry by itself. More than two million tourists visit the Taj every year. B It is a source of revenue for the country. This Court has monitored this petition for over three years with the sole object of preserving and protect- ing the Taj from deterioration and damage due to atmospheric and environmen.tal pollution. It cannot be disputed that the use of coke/coal by the industries emit pollution in the ambient air. The objective behind this c litigation is to stop the pollution while encouraging development of in· dustry. The old concept that development and ecology cannot go together is no longer acceptable. Sustainable development is the answer. The development of industry is essential for the economy of the country, but at the same time the environment and eco-system have to be protected. The D pollution created as a consequence of development must commensurate with the carrying capacity of our eco-systems. [1033-G-H; 1034-A·B] 1.2. The emissions generated by the coke/coal co'1suming industries are air-pollutants and have damaging effect on the Taj and the people living in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ). The atmospheric pollution in E TTZ has to be eliminated at any cost. Not even one percent chance can be taken when • human life apart • the preservation of a prestigious mono- ment like the Taj is involved. In any case, in view of the precautionary principle, the environmental measures must anticipate, prevent andattack the causes of environmental degradation. The 'onus of proor is· on an industry to show that its operation with the aid of coke/coal is environ· F mentally benign. It is, rather, proved beyond doubt the emissions generated by the use of coke/coal by the industries in TTZ are the main polluters of the ambient air. [1037-A-C] Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India & Ors., JT (1996) 7 G SC 375, relied on. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, JT (1996) 2 ,,.___ SC 196, cited. 2. Relocation of the industries from TTZ is to be resorted. to only if H the natural gas which has been brought at the doorstep of TTZ is not M.C. MEHTAv. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] - 975 - acceptable/available by/to the industries as a substitute for coke/coal. The A GAIL has already invited the industr
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.