200

J. Environ. Res. Develop.Journal of Environmental Research And Development Vol. 7 No. 1, July-September 2012

INTRODUCTIONThe Indian Constitution is amongst the few in theworld that contains specific provisions onenvironment protection. The chapters directiveprinciples of state policy and the fundamentalduties are explicitly enunciated the nationcommitment to protect and improve theenvironment. At the beginning of the 21st Centuryenvironment issues have emerged as a majorconcern for the welfare of the people. In India,the concept of environmental protection can beseen originated from the period of Vedas.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVESSocial environment means surrounding of people,human being and their product, their property, theirgroup, their influence, their heritage. Many NGOsand social worker involved protecting theenvironmental pollutions. They seek remedythrough the apex Court. Now a day, it is thedemand of the public, social workers and NGOsto come forward towards awareness regardingenvironmental issues.

ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION

Dubey Amit* and Tiwari B.K. Department of Law, Barkatullah University, Bhopal (INDIA)

Received May 05,2012 Accepted September 20,2012

ABSTRACTIn India, the concept of environmental protection can be seen originated from the period of Vedas.PIL plays vital role in the judiciary in environmental protection. Several local NGOs and publicspirited individuals who have moved the courts to seek relief against numerous problems such asthose created by unchecked vehicular and industrial pollution, negligence in management of solidwaste, construction of large projects and increasing deforestation. Lawyers and NGOs are well awareof how the device of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was devised by our Supreme Court. In order toimprove access to justice for poor and disadvantaged sections, the traditional rules of locus standiwere diluted and a practice was initiated where by public - spirited individuals could approach thecourt on behalf of such sections. In the present time the Supreme court of India expand the meaningof environmental right. The Supreme court is making and creating interpretation which led to thecreation of new rights. As under Article 21, this court has created new rights including the right tohealth and pollution free environment.

Key Words : Public Interest Litigation, Social justice, Public trust, Environmental right, Apex court

METHODOLOGYMost of the part of this research paper hasperformed through secondary data. Hence AIRs,PIL cases and books were refered to evaluatethe paper. Howerver some primary data werealso been obtained to finalize it.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONIn India, there are several local NGOs and publicspirited individuals who have moved the courts toseek relief against numerous problems such asthose created by unchecked vehicular andindustrial pollution,1 negligence in managementof solid waste,2 construction of large projects andincreasing deforestation.3 In order to addressthese problems, there is a need to draw a balancebetween environmental concerns and competingdevelopments such as those of generatingemployment and wealth.Public Interest Litigation (PIL)Since more than two decade, Public InterestLitigation (PIL) has played a vital role by whichbelonging to all walks of life and especially the*Author for correspondence

Short Communication(SS)

201

J. Environ. Res. Develop.Journal of Environmental Research And Development Vol. 7 No. 1, July-September 2012

down-trodden are getting social justice from theSupreme court as well as the High courts.Introducing the PIL concept in the case of RatlamMunicipal Council Vs. Vardhichand case, JusticeKrishna Iyer observed that social justice is due tothe people and therefore the people must be ableto trigger off the jurisdiction vested for their benefitto any functioning. He recognized Public InterestLitigation as a constitutional obligation of theCourts. In the case S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of Indiacase4, Justice P.N. Bhagwati says: procedurebeing merely a handmaiden of justice it shouldnot stand in the way of access to justice to theweaker section of Indian humanity and therefore,where the poor and the disadvantaged areconcerned this court will not insist on a regularwrit petition and even a letter addressed by apublic spirited individual or social action groupacting pro bono public would suffice to invite thejurisdiction of this court.On the rural litigation and entitlement kendra,Dehradun Vs. Uttar Pradesh,5 it is one of theepoch- making decisions of the Supreme court.The court has struck a balance betweenconservation of environment and ecology on theone hand and economic development on the other.It was held that the question arising forconsiderations are of grave movement andsignificance not only to the people residing inMussorie hill range forming part of Himalayas butalso in their implications to the welfare of thegenerality of people living in the country.In K.C. Malhotra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh,6the inhabitants belong to the backward class orweaker section of the society. The MadhyaPradesh High court held that they havefundamental rights under constitution of Indiaentitling them to live as human beings in the areawhich was in the limit of Gwalior MunicipalCorporation.In Resident of Sanjay Nagar and others Vs. Stateof Rajasthan and others case,7 court ordered tounauthorized slaughter house to be closed.In this case the petitioner sought a direction tothe respondents to close down the slaughterhouses illegally operating in Sanjay Nagar andalso for a direction to the State Pollution ControlBoard, Rajasthan, India to take step forpreventing creation of air pollution generated by

functioning of the slaughter houses in the area inquestion. According to facts and circumstances,Rajasthan High court held decision that havingregard to the circumstances of the case andkeeping in view the health of the residents, weare having the view that unauthorized and illegalslaughter houses in the area should be closedimmediately. Bringing environmental awarenessby means of education as a compulsory subjectof study shall be implemented at least from 2004-2005.Lawyers and NGOs are well aware of how thedevice of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) wasdevised by our Supreme court. In order to improveaccess to justice for poor and disadvantagedsections, the traditional rules of locus standi werediluted and a practice was initiated wherebypublic-spirited individuals could approach the courton behalf of such sections.Many authors have argued that frequent judicialinterventions in this area have reduced theincentive for executive agencies to improve theirfunctioning. It has also been urged that thereseems to be a certain clique of individuals whohave come to specialize in filing frivolous PILs.It is further alleged that the decisions given in thesecases depend too much on the personalsensibilities of the judges who hear them andhence result in a lack of consistency in the long-run. Furthermore, the frequent reliance on writjurisdiction reduces the importance of ordinaryremedies such as those of filing representativesuits (under the Code of Civil Procedure) andclaiming damages for torts such as publicnuisance.8Noise pollution was caused due to use of high sounding fire works and others blaring sound producing devices thus resulting in pollution offound. In the case of Free Legal Cell Shri SuganChand Aggarwal alias Bhagat Ji Vs. Govt. of NCTof Delhi and others,9-11 it was alleged that becauseof the indiscriminate use of loudspeakers, noisepollution had become a routine affairs affectingmental as well as physical health of citizen etc. Inthe facts and circumstances of the case, a divisionbench of the Delhi High court held that theenvironmental situation has to be treated as anemergency situation. The environmental pollutionstill regarded as subject of hailing legislation,

202

J. Environ. Res. Develop.Journal of Environmental Research And Development Vol. 7 No. 1, July-September 2012

hypocritical implementation and helpinginterpretation, as observed by apex court. Not onlythe environmental laws should be refined in amanner which could give a legal justification toassessment in terms of compensation but also tobe re-evaluated in a manner that violation ofpollution of law should become unnecessary inthe time to come and this can be materialized byproviding sufficient incentives to the industries andeducation to the layman.Thus a person can claim injunction to stopnuisance if in a noisy locality, there is substantialaddition to the noise by introducing some machineinstrument or performance at dependants premiseswhich materially affects the physical comfort ofthe occupants of the plane life house.This philosophy of public trust finds place in ourconstitutional commitments and our judiciary iscommitted to upholding the same. This is preciselywhy judges are frequently called on to weighindividual interests on the scales of social justice.The conservation of forests and wildlife, as wellas the reduction of pollution-levels are vitalcomponents of such considerations of socialjustice. It is on account of these considerationsthat the higher judiciary must continue to play avigorous role in the domain of environmentalprotection.

CONCLUSIONEnvironmental law has seen considerabledevelopment in the last two decades in India.Most of the principles under which environmentallaw works in India come within this period. Thedevelopment of the laws in this area has seen aconsiderable share of initiative by the Indianjudiciary, particularly the higher judiciary,consisting of the Supreme court of India and theHigh courts of states.PIL has proved to be an effective tool in the areaof environmental protection. The Indian judiciaryadopted the technique of public interest litigationfor the cause of environmental protection in manycases. The basic ideology behind adopting PIL isthat access to justice ought not to be denied tothe needy for the lack of knowledge or anfinances. In PIL, a public spirited individual or anorganization can maintain petition on behalf ofpoor and ignorant individuals. Due to PIL, thecourt indicated contractors of indiscriminate

mining operations which had disturbed anddestroyed ecological balance and ordered for theirclosure in the interest of protection of naturalenvironment and conservation of natural resourcesfor public health.The Supreme court recognized severalunarticulated liberties which were implied inArticle 21 of the constitution like the right to freelegal assistance and the prisoners to be treatedwith dignity were recognized as part offundamental r ight. Supreme court a lsointerpreted the right and personal liberty toinclude the right to wholesome environment. Themost important achievement of the Indianconstitution is the constitutionalisation of theenvironmental problems by the apex court.Before the year of 1980, there were legislationabout control of environmental pollution but littlehad been done to really make pollution control.But in the present time the Supreme court ofIndia expand the meaning of environmentalRight. The Supreme court making interpretationwhich led to the creation of new rights.Eventually under Article 21, this court has creatednew rights including the right to health andpollution free environment.

REFERENCES1. Mehta M.C. Vs. ,Union of India (1998) 8

SCC 206; M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India, 6SCC 12 orders were given for thephasing out of old vehicles, permitting onlythose vehicles which conformed to Euro IInorms at the time. (1999).

2. Patel A. Vs. Union of India, W.P. No. 88 ofContinuing mandamus. (1996).

3. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad Vs. Unionof India, W.P. No. 202 of 1995 (Continuingmandamus) (1995).

4. Gupta S.P. Vs President Of India And Org.on 30 December, 1981 Equivalent citations:AIR 1982 SC 149, 1981 Supp (1) SCC 87,2 SCR 365 (1982).

5. Dehradun kendra Vs . State of U.P., Jenvironmental protection & judicialresponses 145 the direct access litigationand Entitlement, AIR 1985 S.C. 652, (1985).

6. K.C. Malhotra Vs. State of M.P, AIR (1994).7. AIR Raj., 116 DB. (2004).

203

J. Environ. Res. Develop.Journal of Environmental Research And Development Vol. 7 No. 1, July-September 2012

8. Rajamani L., Public Interest EnvironmentalLitigation in India: Exploring issues of access,participation, equity, effectiveness andsustainability, J. Environ Law, 19(3), 293-321, (2007).

9. AIR Delhi, 455 (2009).

pollution problems, J. Environ. Res.Develop., 2(4c), 939-949, (2008).

11. Banerjee D., Environmental jurisprudencein India with reference to initiatives ofSupreme court for Enviro Social justice, J.Environ. Res. Develop., 3(4), 992-997,(2009).10. Oak H., Economic prospective to the air

This fight against drilling in the Arctic Refuge is a fight about our principles. Itsabout standing up for our environment, our families and our future, and I wont giveup this fight.

Senator John Kerry