SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(SC) 26

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND K.N. SINGH, JJ.
M. C. Mehta, Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others, Respondents.
Writ Petn. No. 3727 of 1985, D/- 12-1-1988.
(1953) Ch. 149 : (1953) 2 WLR 58 : (1953) 1 All ER 179 (Rel on). Pride of Derby and Derbyshire Angling Association
Versus
British Celanese Ltd. 16
Petitioner-in person.
Advocates appeared
Mr. B. Datta. Addl. Solicitor General; Mr. R. K. Jain; Mr. Vinod Bobde; Mr. R. N. Trivedi; Mr. K. N. Bhat; Mr. Tapash Ray and Mr. B. R. L. Ayenger Sr. Advocates. Mr. R. P. Singh; Mr. R. P. Kapur; Mr. Ravinder Narain; Mr. S. Sukumaran; Mr. C. B. Singh; Mr. S. K. Dhingra; Mr. P. K. Jain; Mr. D. N. Goburdhan; Mr. Arvind Kumar; Ms. Laxmi Arvind; Mr. Vineet Kumar; Mr. Deepak K. Thakur; Mr. T. V. S. N. Chari; Mr. Vrinda Grover; Mr. Badri Nath; Mr. Rakesh Khanna; Mr. R. P. Singh; Mr. Mukul Mudgal; Mr. A. K. Ghose; Mr. M. M. Gangadeb; Mr. Provir Mitra; Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain; Mr. Suryakant; Mr. Pappy T. Mathews; Mrs. Mamta Kachhawaha; Mrs. Shobha Dikshit; Mr. G. S. Misra; Mr. S. R. Srivastava; Mr. Parijat Sinha; Mr. R. Mohan; Ms. Bina Gupta; Mr. Rajit Kumar; Mr. Krishna Kumar; Mr. R. C. Verma; Mr. Arun Minocha; Mr. Shri Narain; Mr. E. C. Agarwala; Mr. S. R. Setia; Mr. H. K. Puri; Mr. T. S. Rana; Mr. Pramod Swarup; Mr. Ashok Grover; Mr. S S. Markandeya; Mr. Swarup; Ms. Lalita Kohli; Mr. K. C. Dua; Mr. Rajbirbal; Mr. R. A. Gupta and Ms. A. Subhashini, Advocates with them, for Respondents.

Advocates:
A.K.GHOSH, A.Subhashini, ARUN MINOCHA, ARVIND SHARMA, ASHOK GROVER, B.DUTTA, B.R.L.Iyengar, Badri Nath Babu, BINA GUPTA, C.D.Singh, D.N.GOVARDHAN, DIPAK K.THAKUR, E.C.AGARWAL, G.S.MISHRA, H.K.PURI, K.C.DUA, K.N.BHATT, KRISHAN KUMAR GOGNA, LALITA KOHLI, Laxmi Arvind Mathur, M.M.GAGADHAR, MAMTA KACHAVALA, NIKUL MUDGAL, P.K.JAIN, PAPPY T.MATHEWS, PARIJAT SINHA, PRAMOD SVARUP, R.A.GUPTA, R.C.VERMA, R.K.JAIN, R.MOHAN, R.N.TRIVEDI, R.P.KAPUR, R.P.SINGH PAL, RAJBIR BAL, Rakesh K.Khanna, RANJIT GHOSAL, Ravindra Narayan, S.K.DHINGRA, S.Markandaya, S.R.Setia, S.R.SHRIVASTAVA, S.SUKUMARAN, SHOBHA DIXIT, SURYA KANT SHARMA, SUSHIL JAIN, SVARUP JOHN, T.S.RANA, T.V.S.N.Chari, TAPAS RAY, VINIT KUMAR, VINOD A.BOBDE, VRINDA GROVER, VROBIR MITRA

Headnote:

Water Act – Section 16, 32 – Provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959 – Section 1, 114 – Industries in which the business of tanning was being carried on at Jajmau near Kanpur on the banks of the river Ganga. On that occasion we directed that the case in respect of the municipal bodies and the industries which were responsible for the pollution of the water in the river Ganga would be taken up for consideration on the next date of hearing – Accordingly, we took up for consideration first the case against the municipal bodies – Since it was found that Kanpur was one of the biggest cities on the banks of the river Ganga, we took up for consideration the case in respect of the Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika –Held, Organisation of the week should be entrusted to the Nagar Mahapalikas, Municipal Corporations, Town Municipalities, Village Panchayats or such other local authorities having jurisdiction over, the area in question – If the authorities decide to organise such a week it may not be celebrated in the same week throughout India but may be staggered depending upon the convenience of the particular city, town or village – During that week all the citizens including the members of the executive, members of Parliament and the State Legislatures, members of the judiciary may be requested to co-operate with the local, authorities and to take part in the celebrations by rendering free personal service – This would surely create a national awarness of the problems faced by the people by the appalling all-round deterioration of the environment which we are witnessing today – Court request the Ministry of Environment of the Government of India to give a serious consideration to the above suggestion – Order accordingly.

Judgement Key Points

The court views the fundamental duty to protect the environment as a constitutional obligation of both citizens and the state, emphasizing proactive measures and collective responsibility (!) . It underscores that environmental protection is essential for sustainable development and must be prioritized by all to preserve natural resources for future generations (!) .


Judgment

VENKATARAMIAH, J.:- By our judgment dated September 22. 1987 in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. (1987) 4 SCC 463 : (AIR 1988 SC 1037) we issued certain directions with regard to the industries in which the business of tanning was being carried on at Jajmau near Kanpur on the banks of the river Ganga. On that occasion we directed that the case in respect of the municipal bodies and the industries which were responsible for the pollution of the water in the river Ganga would be taken up for consideration on the next date of hearing. Accordingly, we took up for consideration first the case against the municipal bodies. Since it was found that Kanpur was one of the biggest cities on the banks of the river Ganga, we took up for consideration the case in respect of the Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika.

2. The Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika is established under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam). Sub-Section (3) of Section 1 of the Adhiniyam. which is to be found in its 1st Chapter, provides that the 1st Chapter of the Adhiniyam shall come into operation at once and the remaining provisions in relation to a city shall come into operation from such date as the State Government may by notification in the official Gazette appoint in that behalf and different dates may be appointed for different provisions. In exercise of the powers conferred by the said sub-section and in continuation of a notification dated September 28, 1959 bringing into operation Sections 579 and 580 of the Adhiniyam, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh was pleased to issue a notification dated January 18, 1960 appointing the 1st day of February, 1960 as the date on which the remaining provisions of the Adhiniyam and the three Schedules, appended thereto, would come into operation in relation to the cities of Kanpur, Allahabad, Varanasi, Agra and Lucknow, as constituted under Section 3 of the Adhiniyam. The duties and powers of the Mahapalika and Mahapalika authorities are set out in Chapter V of the Adhiniyam. Clauses (iii), (vii) and (viii) of Section 114 of the Adhiniyam, which incorporates the obligatory duties of the Mahapalika, read as follows :

"114. Obligatory duties of the Mahapalika -

It shall be incumbent on the Mahapalika to make reasonable and adequate provision, by any means or measures which it is lawfully competent to it to use or to take, for each of the following matters, namely, --

.......................................

(iii) the collection and removal of sewage, offensive matter and rubbish and treatment and disposal thereof including establishing and maintaining farm or factory ;

..................................

(vii) the management and maintenance of all Mahapalika Waterworks and the construction or acquisition of new works necessary for a sufficient supply of water for public and private purposes,

(viii) guarding from pollution water used for human consumption and preventing polluted water from being so used ;

.................................."

3. Sections 251, 388, 396, 397, 398, 405 and 407 of the Adhiniyam read as follows :

"251. Provision of means for disposal of sewage - The Mukhya Nagar Adhikari may, for the purpose of receiving, treating, storing, disinfecting, distributing or otherwise disposing of sewage, construct any work within or without the City or purchase or take on lease any land, building, engine, material or apparatus either within or without the City or enter into any arrangement with any person for any period not exceeding twenty years for the removal or disposal of sewage within or without the City.

....................................

388. Provision may be made by Mukhya Nagar Adhikari for collection, etc., or excrementitious and polluted matter - (1) The Mukhya Nagar Adhikari may give public notice of his intention to provide, in such portion of the City as he may specify, for the collection, removal and disposal by Mahapalika agency, of all excrementitious and pollu

















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top