Back
J.JAGANNADHA RAO, S.B.MAJMUDAR
A. P. Pollution Control Board – Appellant
Versus
M. V. Nayudu (Retd. ) – Respondent
The court's ratio decidendi is that the precautionary principle and the new burden of proof in environmental matters are now part of law, requiring adequate judicial and scientific inputs in environmental adjudications, and that courts and authorities can refer complex scientific issues to specialized expert bodies for investigation and opinion.
JUDGMENT
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.
1. Leave granted in all the special leave petitions. It is said:
"The basic insight of ecology is that all living things exist in interrelated systems; nothing exists in isolation. The world system in weblike; to pluck one strand is to cause all to vibrate; whatever happens to one part has ramifications for all the rest. Our actions are not individual but social; they reverberate throughout the whole ecosystem". [Science Action Coalition by A. Fritsch. Environmental Ethics: Choices for Concerned Citizens 3-4 (1980)]. (1988) Vol. 12 Harv. Env. L. Rev. at 313)."
2. Four of these appeals which arise out of SLP (C) No. 10317-10320 of 1998 were filed against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 1.5.1998 in four writ petitions. namely. W.P. No. 17832 of 1997 and three other connected writ petitions. All the appeals were filed by the A.P. Pollution Control Board. Three of the above writ petitions were filed as public interest cases by certain persons and the fourth writ petition was filed by the Gram Panchayat, Peddaspur.
3. The fifth Civil Appeal which arises out of SLP(C) No. 13380 of 1998 was filed against the judgment in W.P. No. 16969 of
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
