High Court Of Calcutta
UMESH CHANDRA BENERJEE
PEOPLE UNITED FOR BETTER LIVING IN CALCUTTA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
Matter 2851 Of 1992
Decided On : 09/24/1992
WETLANDS - ECOLOGICAL BALANCE - PRESERVATION - DEVELOPMENT - CONFLICT - JUDICIAL REVIEW - CALCUTTA WETLANDS - ENCROACHMENT - RESTRAINED.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, environmentalists, and local residents, filed a writ petition challenging the State Government's decision to reclaim 784 acres of Calcutta's wetlands for the expansion of a satellite township, including the development of a World Trade Centre and a Public Exhibition Centre.
Finding of the Court:
1. Wetlands provide significant environmental, economic, and social benefits, including nutrient recycling, flood control, water purification, habitat for flora and fauna, and employment opportunities. 2. The proposed reclamation would have detrimental effects on the environment, including loss of biodiversity, disruption of the natural drainage system, and increased pollution. 3. The proposed World Trade Centre and Public Exhibition Centre are not essential developmental projects and their economic viability is uncertain. 4. The State Government has not provided a comprehensive plan for the preservation of wetlands or a justification for the proposed reclamation.
Issues: 1. Whether the proposed reclamation of wetlands for the expansion of a satellite township is justified in light of the ecological and environmental importance of wetlands. 2. Whether the proposed World Trade Centre and Public Exhibition Centre are essential developmental projects that outweigh the environmental concerns associated with the reclamation. 3. Whether the State Government has adequately considered the environmental impact of the proposed reclamation and has taken steps to minimize the adverse effects.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Wetlands are a valuable natural resource that provide numerous environmental, economic, and social benefits. 2. The proposed reclamation of wetlands for the expansion of a satellite township would have detrimental effects on the environment and would not be in the best interests of the public. 3. The proposed World Trade Centre and Public Exhibition Centre are not essential developmental projects and their economic viability is uncertain. 4. The State Government has not provided a comprehensive plan for the preservation of wetlands or a justification for the proposed reclamation.
Final Decision: The Court issued an injunction restraining the State Government from reclaiming any further wetlands and from granting permission for any change in land use from agricultural to residential or commercial in the area in question. The State Government was also directed to maintain the nature and character of the wetlands in their present form and to stop all encroachment. The Court clarified that the State Government could apply for a variation of the order within twelve months if it wished to pursue the development of a World Trade Centre or Public Exhibition Centre on a portion of the wetlands, but that the status quo would continue until such time.
( 1 ) POPULATION growth and modern technological developments by themselves pose a great threat to the very existence of living and non-living organisms - this is not confined to a particular region, but it has crossed transnational frontiers. In 1972 the Stockholm Conference under the auspices of the United Nations did deliberate upon the issues of protection of human environment. The Habitat Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, 1976 and the World Water Conference at Argentina in 1977 recorded a detailed discussion as regards the water pollution. It is not out of place to mention that water pollution along with the pollution in the air and the noise pollution are in a much higher degree in the metropolitan centres than in the rural sectors and as such population influx and technological developments can be ascribed to be the two basic factors for such environmental degradation. The National Environmental Engineering Research Institute has confirmed that levels of sulphur dioxide and other particulate matters in big cities have exceeded the permissible limits as prescribed by the World Health Organisation (W. H. O. ).
( 2 ) WHILE it is true that in a developing country there shall have to be developments, but that development shall have to be in closest possible harmony with the environment, as otherwise there would be development but no environment, which would result in total devastation, though, however, may not be felt in presenti but at some future point of time, but then it would be too late in the day, however, to control and improve the environment. Nature will not tolerate us after a certain degree of its destruction and it will in any event, have its toll on the lives of the people : Can the present-day society afford to have such a state and allow the nature to have its toll in future - the answer shall have to be in the negative : The present day society has a responsibility towards the posterity for their proper growth and development so as to allow the posterity to breathe normally and live in a cleaner environment and have a consequent fuller development:time has now come therefore, to check and control the degradation of the environment and since the Law Courts also have a duty towards the society for its proper growth and further development and more so by reason of definite legislations in regard thereto as noted hereinafter, it is a plain exercise of the judicial power to see that there is no such degradation : of the society and there ought not to be any hesitation in regard thereto - but does that mean and imply stoppage of every developmental programme - the answer is again 'no' :there shall have to be a proper balance between the development and the environment so that both can co-exist without affecting the other. On the wake of the 21st century, in my view, it is neither feasible not practicable to have a negative approach to the development process of the country or of the society, but that does not mean, without any consideration for the environment. As noted above, there should be a proper balance between the protection of environment and the development process : The society shall have to prosper, but not at the cost of the environment and in the similar vein, the environment shall have to be protected but not at the cost of the development of the society - there shall have to be both development and proper environment and as such, a balance has to be found out and administrative actions ought to proceed in accordance therewith and not d'hors the same.
( 3 ) ERRONEOUSLY at times pollution is equated with environment. In fact, pollution is one of the aspects of environment and the expression 'environment' has to be viewed with all its components and considered in its totality. There are indeed a wide range of physical, biological and man-made components that interact in building up an environment. This has made the subject complex and a matter for multi-disciplinary
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.