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

1996 Supreme(SC) 2285

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Kuldip Singh, S. Saghir Ahmad and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 664 of 1993
Decided On : 18-04-1996

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ms Seema Midha and K.R. Rajesekaran, Advocates
For the Respondents:Ms H. Wahi, P.K. Manohar, S.K. Sinha, R.K. Mehta, K.L. Taneja, C.V.S. Rao, S.K. Mehta, A.S. Bhasme, Ms M. Karanjawala, V. Krishnamurthi, Vineet Kumar, K. Ram Kumar, A. Mariarputham, R. Sasiprabhu, P.N. Puri, Kh. Nobin Singh, Ms Indu Malhotra, Ms Meenakshi Arora, Sanjay Parikh, Anip Sachthey, H.K. Puri, S.N. Bhat and Ms Ruby Ahuja, Advocates

Headnote:

Water Act, 1974 - Section 3 - Constitution of India - Article 32 of- Public interest litigation – Preventing irreversible ecological damage to coastal areas - Main grievance in this petition is that a notification declaring coastal stretches as Coastal Regulation Zones hereinafter referred to as the Regulation Zones which regulates the activities in the said zones has not been implemented or enforced - This has led to continued degradation of ecology in said coastal areas - There is also a challenge to the validity of the notification whereby the first notification has been amended, resulting in further relaxations of the provisions of Notification and such relaxation, it is alleged will help in defeating the intent of the main Notification itself – Held, Considering the fact that Pollution Control Boards are not only overworked but simultaneously have a limited role to play insofar as it relates to controlling of pollution for the purpose of ensuring effective implementation of notifications as also of the Management Plans, the Central Government should consider setting up under Section 3 of Act State Coastal Management Authorities in each State or zone and also a National Coastal Management Authority - States which have not filed Management Plans with the Central Government are directed to file the complete plans - Central Government shall and approve the said plans, with or without modifications within three months thereafter. It is possible that the plans as submitted by respective State Governments and Union Territories may not be acceptable to the Ministry of Environment and Forests - Returning said plans for modifications and then resubmission of same may become an unnecessary, time-consuming and, perhaps a futile exercise - In order to ensure that these plans are at very earliest court direct that the plans as submitted will be examined by Central Government who will inform the State Government or Union Territory concerned with regard to any shortcomings or modifications which the Ministry of Environment and Forests may suggest - If necessary, a discussion amongst the representatives of the State Governments and the Ministry of Environment and Forests should take place and thereafter the plans should be by Ministry of Environment if necessary, by carrying out such modifications as may be required - Decision by Ministry of Environment and Forests in this regard shall be final and binding - As far as this Court is concerned this matter stands concluded except to examine reports which are to be filed by all States with regard to approval of Management Plans or any classification which may be sought - Order accordingly

ORDER :

Kuldip Singh, S. Saghir Ahmad and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.

1. Concern for the protection of ecology and for preventing irreversible ecological damage to the coastal areas of the country has led to the filing of the present petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India as a public interest litigation.

2. The main grievance in this petition is that a notification dated 19-2-1991 declaring coastal stretches as Coastal Regulation Zones (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulation Zones') which regulates the activities in the said zones has not been implemented or enforced. This has led to continued degradation of ecology in the said coastal areas. There is also a challenge to the validity of the notification dated 18-8-1994 whereby the first notification dated 19-2-1991 has been amended, resulting in further relaxations of the provisions of the 1991 Notification and such relaxation, it is alleged, will help in defeating the intent of the main Notification itself.

3. The petitioner is a registered voluntary organisation working for the cause of environment protection in India. India has a coastline running into 6000 kms which has abundance of natural endowments, geographic attractions and natural beauty. According to the petitioner, these coastal areas are highly complex and have dynamic ecosystems, sensitive to development pressures. The stresses and pressure of high population growth, non-restrained development, lack of adequate infrastructure facilities for the resident population are stated to be some of the factors responsible for the decline in environmental quality in these areas. The developmental activities in the coastal areas are stated to cause short-term and long-term physical, chemical and biological changes that will and has caused damage to flora and fauna, public health and environment. It is further alleged that as a consequence of indiscriminate industrialisation and urbanisation, without the requisite pollution control systems, the coastal waters are highly polluted.

4. It is further the case of the petitioner that some of the coastal areas contained extensive groundwater resources and sometimes mineral resources, while in other areas, there are iron ore, oil and gas resources and mangrove forests. As a result of the impact of tidal waves and cyclones, mangrove forests are being increasingly destroyed, while some of the major fishing areas in some of the coastal areas of the country are undergoing serious damage consequent to ecologically unsound development. Over-exploitation of groundwater in the coastal areas in places like Madras and Vishakhapatnam is stated to have resulted in growing intrusion of salt water from the sea to inland areas and fresh water aquifers previously used for drinking, agriculture and horticulture are getting highly damaged. Unplanned urbanisation and industrialisation in the coastal belts is stated to be causing fast disappearance of fertile agricultural lands, fruit gardens and energy plantations like casuarina trees, that serve as windbreakers and protect inland habitations from the cyclonic damages.

5. With a view to protect the ecological balance in the coastal areas, the then Prime Minister is stated to have written a letter in November 1981 to the Chief Ministers of coastal States in which she stated as under:

    "The degradation and misutilization of beaches in the coastal States is worrying as the beaches have aesthetic and environmental value as well as other values. They have to be kept clear of all activities at least up to 500 metres from the water at the maximum high tide. If the area is vulnerable to erosion, suitable trees and plants have to be planted on the beaches without marring their beauty. Beaches must be kept free from all kinds of artificial development. Pollution from industrial and town wastes must also be avoided totally."

Working groups were set up by the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 1982 to prepare environmental guidelines for development of beach

      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