TIRPUR DYEING FACTORY OWNERS ASSN. versus NOYYAL RIVER A. PROTECTION ASSN. & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 14 S.C.R. 1051 · Decided: 06-10-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 14 S.C.R. 1051 
.,,,,. 
TIRPUR DYEING FACTORY OWNERS ASSN. 
A 
v. 
NOYYAL RIVER A. PROTECTION ASSN. & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6776 of 2009) 
OCTOBER 6, 2009 
B 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI AND 
)... 
DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] 
' 
; 
Environmental Law - Pollution control - PIL - Alleging 
industrial units responsible for pollution of river water and c 
adversely affecting reservoirs, tanks and channels of water -
High Court as an interim measure imposing fine on the units 
- On appeal, held: Industrial units being responsible for 
pollution, cannot escape responsibility to meet out the 
-
)l. expenses of reversing the ecology -
The principles of D 
'polluters pay' and 'precautionary principle' have to be read 
with, the doctrine of 'sustainable development' - The fine is 
based on the survey of Committee Report - Farmers who,, 
have suffered because of the pollution caused by them, -are 
entitled to compensation - Direction to industrial units to pay E 
the fine - Doctrines/Principles. 
-\ 
Respondent No. 1-Association filed a Public Interest 
Litigation before High Court alleging that a large number 
of industries (appellants) had indulged in dyeing and 
F 
bleaching works at Tirupur area and discharging the 
industrial effluents into the Noyyal river which created 
water pollution to the extent that the water was neither 
fit for irrigation nor was potable. The pollution had also 
adversely affected the Orthapalyam reservoir and other 
G 
tanks and channels of the said river. Respondent-
-
'( Association stated that earlier a writ petition was filed 
raising similar issues, which was disposed of by High 
Court on the basis of Memo of Understanding on the 
terms that pollution control measures would be 
1051 
H 
1052 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A implemented and damages shall be pa.id~ The industries 
were directed to contribute an amount to meet the 
expenses of cleaning of the dam within a particular 
period. The industrial unit sought for time for compliance 
of the directions, which was denied by High Court. In SLP 
B against the said order, Supreme Court issued certain 
directions to some of the units. On compliance of the 
directions, the petitions were dismissed. State 
Government directed study on the restoration of the 
ecology of river dam etc. As per the study report, there 
c had been no improvement in the quality of water. Hence 
the writ petition was filed before the High Court. 
I 
I 
High Court as an interim measure directed payment 
of fine on pro-rata basis @ six paise, eight paise, and ten 
paise per litre. Hence the present appeal. Appellant 
D contended that the liability of fine was fastened on the 
_;1 
-
unit owners without any basis. 
Disposing of the. appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. In the instant case, it is evident from the 
E. 
C 
record that the High ourt issued directions from time to 
time but the members of the appellant Association had 
complied with such orders partly. The High Court 
constituted an .Expert Committee and also the Monitoring 
Committee to assess the damage caused to the dam and 
F the river and to find out the modalities to re.move the effect 
of pollution. It also got the assessment of the amount 
required for removing~ttt.e sludge from the river and for 
the treatment of the ~at~~' making it worth for irrigation 
and· human consumptiorr.'i{Para 12] [1063-G-H; 1064-A-B] 
G 
1.2. There has been una·bated pollution by the 
members of the appellant-Association: They cam;-ot 
escape the responsit~!lity to meet out the expenses of 
reversing the~ecolog~y. They are bound to meet the 
H expenses of removing the sludge of the river and also for 
). 
..., -
TIRPUR DYEING FACTORY OWNERS ASSN. v. 
1053 
NOYYAL RIVER A. PROTECTION ASSN. 
cleaning the dam. The principles of "polluters-pay" and 
A 
"precautionary principle" have to be read with the 
doctrine of "sustainable development". It becomes the 
responsibility of the members of the appellant 
Association that they have to carry out their industrial 
activities without polluting the water. A large number of B 
farmers have suffered because of the pollution caused 
by them. They could not cultivate any crop in their. 
respective lands. The committee made a complete survey 
and assessed the loss and identified the families which 
are entitled to compensation. [Para 27] [1073-B-D] 
c 
1.3. In case, in spite of stringent conditions, 
degradation of environment continues and reaches a 
stage of no return, the

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