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

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 504 · Decided: 07-05-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.K. SABHARWAL · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
M.C. MEHTA 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
MAY 7, 2004 
B 
[Y.K. SABHARWAL AND B.N. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Environmental Law: 
C 
Pollution-Industries located in residential and non-conforming areas 
in Delhi contrary to the Master Plan and law-Directions by Supreme 
Court in 1999 to close or shift such industries out of Delhi by 31.12.1999-
Application by State Government seeking time and for regularisation of 
industries where concentration of industry is 70% or more in a residential 
area (INS/TU Regularisation)-Thereafter, no steps were taken to comply 
D with the orders-Held, on the basis of the materials on record and the 
inactions and the casual approach of the State Government and various 
Government authorities, such INSITU regularisation cannot be permitted 
as it has taken into account the pollution angle-Directions issued to close 
down various categories of industries with time frame-Delhi Development 
E Act, !957-Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957-National Capital 
Region Planning Board Act, 1985-Constitution of India-Articles 21 & 
243W 
A large number of hazardous and noxious industries and heavy 
F and large industries (categories A to F) came into existence in residential 
and non-conforming areas of the Delhi State contrary to the Master 
Plan and Zonal Plan of the State. Public interest litigation petitions 
were filed before Supreme Court challenging the existence of such 
industries in violation of the Delhi Master Plan under the Delhi 
Development Act, 1957, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and 
G other statutory provisions. This Court passed orders from time to time 
over a decade directing various categories of industries situated in 
residential/ non-conforming areas to be shifted out of Delhi. Despite the 
directions, the State Government failed to take any action and a large 
number of industries continued to be operated in residential/non-
H conforming areas in violation of law. 
504 
M. C. MEHTA v. U.0.1. 
505 
This Court issued an order on 8.9.1999 directing the State A 
Government to close down all the industries situated in residential 
areas by 31.12.1999. On 10.12.1999, the State Government filed an 
application seeking extension of time to close down the industries till 
March 2004 and seeking INSITU regularisation of industrial units 
where concentration of industry is 70% or more in a residential area. B 
The Municipal Corporation of Delhi, National Regional Board 
and the Central Pollution Control Board vehemently opposed the 
continued unauthorised use for industrial activity of residential/non-
conforming areas and the proposal of INSITU regularisation. 
The National Regional Board contended that such industries 
should be immediately closed down or shifted; that such regularisation 
would defeat the very purpose of the National Capital Region Board 
Act, 1985 under which NCR was established to decongest the city of 
c 
~L 
D 
The Central Pollution Control Board contended that the 
regularisation would further result in air and water pollution and 
would also affect the underground water. 
Disposing the matters, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. INSITU regularisation cannot be done if it results 
in violation of right of life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution 
E 
of India. The question will have to be considered not only from the F 
angle of those who have set up industrial units in violation of the 
Master Plan but also who are residents and using their premises as 
allowed by law. Further, the regularisation affects not only the 
remaining 30% residents of the areas wherein regularisation may be 
in contemplation but has effect on the entire area, particularly with 
respect to infrastructure available. (518-G-H; 519-A) 
G 
1.2 The facts demonstrate that the State Government and the 
Delhi Development Authority have been wholly remiss of all its 
functions, duties and obligations. The Central Government, for the 
reasons which are not far to seek, has been shifting its stand. There H 
506 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A is no plausible answer to the question as to why in the meanwhile the 
illegality should conti1rne without any action. In any case, as at present 
there is no regularisation. The industrial activities in residential/ non-
conforming zones are wholly illegal. The illegal. industrialisation in 
residential/non-conforming area commenced and has continued and 
B the Authority, the Governments and their agencies have been totally 
negligent in disc
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.