LL.B.

V Term

Paper – LB - 5037 - Environmental Law

Prescribed Legislations:
1. The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
2. The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
3. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
4. The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
5. The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995
6. The National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997
7. The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (18 of 2003)
8. The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
9. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
10. The Indian Forest Act, 1927
11. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act,
2007.

Prescribed Books:
1. Shyam Diwan and Armin Rosencranz, Environmental Law and Policy in India –
Cases, Materials and Statutes (2nd ed., 2001)
2. P. Leelakrishnan, Environmental Law Case Book (2nd ed., 2006)
3. Gurdip Singh, Environmental Law in India (2005)
4. P. Leelakrishnan, Environmental Law in India (3rd ed., 2008)
5. Stuart Bell & Donald Mc Gillivray, Environmental Law (7th ed., 2008)

Recommended Readings:
1. The National Environment Policy, 2006
2. The National Forest Policy, 1988
3. The National Water Policy, 2002
4. The Wildlife Conservation Strategy, 2002
5. The World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future,
1987
6. C.S.E., The State of India’s Environment 1984-85, The Second to Fifth reports
1986-1999
7. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). “Climate Change 2007”.
 ii

Chapter 1 : Environment and Pollution (2 Lectures)

Environment – Meaning and Scope; Pollution – Air, Water, Environmental - Meaning,

Causes and Effects; Dimensions and Magnitude of the Problem of Environmental
Degradation; Need for Legal Control of Pollution.

Chapter 2 : International Environmental Law (3 Lectures)

1. Human Right to Healthy Environment; Convention on Access to Information, Public

Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters,
1998 (Aarhus Convention)
2. U.N. Conference on Human Environment, 1972 – Stockholm Principles, Establishment of
Environmental Institutions like UNEP.
3. World Charter for Nature, 1982
4. Ozone Protection – Montreal Protocol for the Protection of Ozone Layer, 1987 as
amended
5. U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, 1992 - Rio Principles; U.N.
Convention on Biological Diversity,1992; Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, 2000; U.N.
Convention on Climate Change1992, Kyoto Protocol, 1997; Forest Principles; Agenda
21
6. Johannesburg Conference, 2002
7. Delhi Summit, 2002

Chapter 3 : Fundamental Principles of Environmental Protection (3-5 Lectures)

Development v. Environment; Sustainable Development – Meaning, Definition, Object and

Scope; Inter-generational and Intra-generational Equity; Precautionary Principle; Polluter
Pays Principle; Public Trust Doctrine
1. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India,
AIR 1996 SC 1446 (Bichhri Village case) 1
2. Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715 15
3. A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu, AIR 1999 SC 812 23
4. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 3751 34
5. Goa Foundation, Goa v. Diksha Holdings Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2001 SC 184 56
6. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 1696 (CNG Vehicles case) 62
7. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, AIR 2005 SC 4256 72
8. Intellectuals Forum, Tirupathi v. State of A.P., AIR 2006 SC 1350 82
9. Ms. Susetha v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2006 SC 2893 93
 iii

Chapter 4 : Constitutional Perspective (3-5 Lectures)

Human Right to Healthy Environment; Fundamental Rights - Right to Wholesome

Environment - Article 14 (Right to equality, non-arbitrary and non-discriminatory treatment),
Article 19(1)(g) (Freedom to carry on trade or business), Article 21 (Right to life, livelihood
and wholesome environment) and Article 32 (Right to Constitutional remedies); Directive
Principles of State Policy – Article 47, 48-A; Fundamental Duty – Article 51-A(g); Article
226 (Powers of High Courts); Public Interest Litigation - Nature – Non-Adversarial,
Collaborative, Co-operative and Investigative; Locus Standi - Pro Bono Publico;
Representative Standing; Citizens’ Standing
10. Subash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 420 97
11. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, AIR 2006 SC 177
12. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P., AIR 1982 SC 652
(Dehradun-Mussorie Hills quarrying case) 101
13. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 734 (Taj Trapezium case) 105
14. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997) 1 SCC 388; AIR 2000 SC 1997; 118
AIR 2002 SC 1515 129
15. Sachidanand Pandey v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1987 SC 1109 136
16. Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 514 (Sariska Case)
17. M/s. Abhilash Textiles v. Rajkot Municipal Corpn., AIR 1988 Guj. 57 150
18. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2006) 3 SCC 399 (Closure of industries in Delhi)
19. Forum, Prevention of Environment & Sound Pollution v. Union of India, AIR
2006 SC 348 154
20. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board v. C. Kenchappa,
AIR 2006 SC 2038 157

Chapter 5 : Prevention and Control of Water Pollution (5 Lectures for Chapter 5

and 6 combined)

The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 – Water Pollution – Meaning;
Central and State Pollution Control Boards –Constitution, Powers and Functions; Water
Pollution Control Areas; Samples of Effluents – Procedure; Consent Requirement –
Procedure, Grant/Refusal, Withdrawal, Review, Appeals, Revision; Restraint Order; Citizen
Suit Provision; Offences and Penalties; The Water Cess (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1977
21. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1037 (Kanpur Tanneries case) 167
22. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1115 (Municipalities case) 176
23. M/s. Delhi Bottling Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Board for the Prevention and
Control of Water Pollution, AIR 1986 Del. 152 183
24. Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardichand, AIR 1980 SC 1622 186
25. State of M.P. v. Kedia Leather & Liquor Ltd., AIR 2003 SC 3236 194
26. U.P. Pollution Control Board v. Dr. Bhupendra Kumar Modi
(2009) 2 SCC 147 198
 iv

Chapter 6 : Prevention and Control of Air Pollution

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981- Air Pollution – Meaning, Causes
and Effects; Central and State Pollution Control Boards - Functions; Air Pollution Control
Area; Consent Requirement - Procedure, Grant/Refusal, Withdrawal; Restraint Orders;
Citizen Suits; Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000; Offences/Penalties;
Vehicular pollution
27. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 734 (Taj Trapezium case)
28. Murli S. Deora v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 40 207
29. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 1696 (CNG Vehicles case)
30. Forum, Prevention of Environmental & Sound Pollution v. Union of India,
AIR 2005 SC 3136 209
31. Orissa State Prevention and Control of Pollution Board v. M/s. Orient
Paper Mills, AIR 2003 SC 1966 222
32. Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare
Association, AIR 2000 SC 2773

Chapter 7 : Environmental Protection (3-5 Lectures)

The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Aims and Objects; Meaning of “Environment” and
“Environmental Pollutant”; Powers and Functions of the Central Government; Environment
Authority - Constitution; Delegation Powers; Offences/Penalties; Effectiveness of the Act;
Environmental Impact Assessment, 2006; Environmental Audit; Coastal Regulation
Notification, 1991 (as amended up-to-date); The National Environment Appellate Authority
Act, 1997 - Constitution, Powers, Functions
33. Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715
34. S. Jagannath v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 811 (Shrimp Culture case) 226
35. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 1696 (CNG vehicles case)
36. F.B. Taraporawala v. Bayer India Ltd., AIR 1997 SC 1846
37. A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu, AIR 1999 SC 812

Chapter 8 : Handling of Hazardous Substances – Legal Controls

Legal Control of Hazardous Waste, Bio-Medical Waste, Genetic Engineering; Industrial

Accidents –Principle of ‘No fault ‘ and ‘Absolute’ Liability; Public Liability Insurance – The
Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991; The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995
38. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 965 (Oleum Gas Leakage) 234
39. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 982 247
40. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086 253
41. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2231
(Re-location of Industries in Delhi)
 v

42. Union of India v. Union Carbide Corporation,

AIR 1990 SC 273; AIR 1992 SC 248
43. Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 1480
44. Research Foundation for Science v. Union of India, 2007 (10) SCALE 594. 263

Chapter 9 : Protection and Conservation of Forests,

Biodiversity and Wildlife (3-7Lectures)

The Indian Forest Act, 1927; The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980; National Forest Policy
1988; Guidelines, 1994; Kinds of Forest Land - Private, Reserved, Village, Protected; De-
eservation of Forests - Non-Forest Use of Forest Land; Rights of Tribals, Forest Dwellers;
Use of Forest Land - Mining, Eco-Tourism, Mega Projects
The Biological Diversity Act, 2002; Protection of Wildlife - The Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972; Sanctuaries and National Parks; Licensing of Zoos and Parks

45. Union of India v. Kamath Holiday Resorts, AIR 1996 SC 1040 271
46. Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 514 (Sariska Case)
47. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, AIR 1998 SC 769;
AIR 2005 SC 4256
48. Indian Handicrafts Emporium v. Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 3240
49. K.M. Chinnappa v. Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 724
50. Bimal N. Desai v. State of Karnataka, AIR 2003 SC 2246

Important Note:
1. The topics, legislations and cases mentioned above are not exhaustive. The teachers
teaching the course shall be at liberty to add new topics/legislations/cases.
2. The students are required to study the legislations as amended up-to-date and consult the
latest editions of books.
3. The question paper shall include one compulsory question. The question papers set for the
examinations held during 2007-08 and 2008-09
*****
 vi

LL.B. V Term Examinations, December, 2007

Note: Attempt five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.
All questions carry equal marks.
1 Attempt briefly any four of the following:
(i) Concept of Sustainable Development
(ii) Liability of the insurer under Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991;
(iii) Concept of precautionary principle;
(iv) What is Environmental Impact Assessment? Briefly explain its relevance to
Environment. (Protection) Act, 1986.
(v) What is constitution and powers of National Environmental Appellate
Authority?
2. “No State has the right to use or permit the use of its territory in such a manner as to
cause injury by fumes in or to the territory of another or the property of persons therein
when the case is of serious consequence and the injury is established by clear and
convincing evidence.”
Discuss the above principle laid down in Trail Smelter Arbitration and the expansion
of its scope from Stockholm to Rio and Beyond.
3. The state of Tamil Nadu granted permission for the construction of a shopping complex
on the huge water tank for the purpose of user for resettlement of those persons who were
displaced due to expansion of a highway project. The permission was granted mainly on
the ground that the water tank was artificial tank and not a natural water resource. It was
also pointed out that the water tank was lying in disuse for a long time. Discuss the
legality of the permission granted by the state of Tamil Nadu in view of the mandate of
Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle which have been judicially
accepted as part of Indian Environmental Law. Refer to decided cases.
4. Lloyd Industries were running plant for the manufacture of vanaspati and were
discharging untreated noxious effluents into drainage system for the last fifteen years.
The Municipal Commissioner issued notice to Lloyd Industries directing them to stop
discharging untreated effluents failing which Llyod Industries were called upon to close
their operations. Lloyd Industries challenged the constitutionality of the notice on the
ground that the requirement of treatment of effluents by installation of treatment plant
would lead to closure of the industry. Discuss the constitutional validity of the notice in
the light of decided cases.
5. (a) What is public trust doctrine? Discuss in the light of Intellectual Forum, Tirupathi v
State of A.P., AIR 2006 S.C. 1350.
(b) What is principle of common differentiated responsibilities? Discuss its significance
and relevance to multilateral environmental agreements.
6. (a) On 27 November, 1999, the petitioners moved before the Pollution Control Board
under section 25 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 for the
grant of consent to install a plant for the manufacture of nitric acid. On 9th June, 2000,
the Board passed an order of refusal to grant the consent. The petitioners’ appeal was
 vii

rejected by the appellate authority on the ground that the application of the petitioners
filed before the Board for grant for consent was not complete in all respects. Do you
agree with the decision of the appellate authority? Give reasons and refer to relevant
statutory provisions in support of your answer.
(b) Who has the power to constitute an appellate authority under the Air (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1981? What are the inadequacies of the constitution of the
appellate authority? Suggest remedies in the light of judicial decision, if any.

7. On 11 January, 2004 Minex (India) Ltd., a mining industry obtained consent from
Pollution Control Board as well as environmental clearance from Central Government for
conducting mining Operations in Aravalli hills. The Environmental Authority established
by Central Government under section 3(3) of the Environment (Projection) Act, 1986
issued certain directions to Minex (India) Ltd. which failed to comply with the directions.
What punishment is prescribed for it under Environmental (Protection) Act? Distinguish
punitive mechanisms of the Environment (Protection) Act with that provided under the
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and Air (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Act.
8. (a) Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), an American Corporation with subsidiaries
operating throughout the world, was running its subsidiary, Union Carbide India Limited
(UCIL), a chemical plant in Bhopal. On the tragic night of December 2-3, 1984, Methyl
Isocynate (MIC), highly toxic gas, leaked from the plant and rained death and destruction
upon innocent and helpless people. After long legal battle in the courts of United State
and India, the Supreme Court of India mediated a US $ 470 million settlement in the case
and quashed criminal proceedings against corporate officials. Discuss the legal validity of
the settlement with special reference to ‘deep pocket theory’ evolved by Supreme Court
in Shriram gas leakage case.
*****
LL.B. V Term (Supplementary) Examinations, May-June, 2008
Note: Attempt five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.
All questions carry equal marks.
1 Attempt briefly any four of the following:
(a) Environmental Impact Assessment.
(b) “Deep Pocket” Theory
(c) Concept of “Environmental Pollution”
(d) Liability under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991.
(e) Concept of air pollution.
2. Describe the composition and powers of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)
 viii

The CPCB issues certain directions to prevent pollution from a factory but the
directions were not complied with to the satisfaction of CPCB. What action can be taken
by CPCB against the owners of the factory?
3. “It is the duty of the Central Government to ensure a pollution-free environment and for
this purpose it has vast powers to take all preventive and remedial measures.” Discuss
these powers. Can a court direct the Central Government to constitute an authority for this
purpose? Refer to statutory provisions and decided cases.
4. Explain “precautionary principle” as applicable in environmental law. What is the
‘special burden of proof’ applicable in environmental cases? Discuss with reference to
judicial pronouncements.
5. Do you agree with the statement that the execution of a large project, having diverse and
far-reaching environmental impact, without proper study and understanding of its
environmental impact and without proper planning of mitigative measures is a violation
of fundamental rights of the affected people guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India? Discuss in the light of at least one case in which this kind of
problem was taken to the court. Can a member of the public not affected by the project in
question approach the court against the execution of the project?
6. “The Bichhri village case presents a dismal picture of not only the ineffectiveness of
pollution control laws but also indicates the courage of industries to play with judicial
orders/directions.” Discuss this case and point out the “polluter pays principle” applied in
environmental cases.
7. “Our legal system includes the ‘public trust doctrine’ as part of its jurisprudence.”
Discuss the doctrine and analyse some cases in which the court decided the issues in the
light of this doctrine.
8. Write short notes on any two of the following:
(a) Describe the present position of Section 133, Cr.P.C. in controlling water
pollution.
(b) Describe the law relating to declaring an area as air pollution control area.
(c) “The liability of owner handling hazardous substances is absolute.” Discuss.
*****
LL.B. V Term Examinations, December, 2008
Note: Attempt five question including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.
All questions carry equal marks.
1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:
(i) Explain the term ‘environment’ and the ‘causes’ for environmental degradation.
(ii) The Aarhus Convention 1998 promotes the procedural human right guarantees
necessary to ensure effective environmental protection.
(iii) Article 48A of the Constitution of India casts a duty on the state to protect and
improve the environment.
 ix

(iv) The Air Act 1981 and Water Act 1974 require the State Pollution Control
Boards to provide emission data to build a citizen’s case.
(v) Environmental Impact Assessment examines the consequence and predicts
future changes in the environment.
2. “The need and desire to protect the environment at the global level from Stockholm
Conference to Johannesburg Summit has immense value in drawing attention to the
problem of environmental deterioration and methods to prevent or remedy it.” Elucidate
3. (i) “Environmental ethics emphasizes the construction of environmental protection
around the concept of inter-generational and intra-generational equity.” Discuss.
(ii) The Department of Public Works ordered for acquisition of a Wetland of
considerable natural beauty as a part of its plan to widen the State Highway. Before
the project commenced, five citizens brought an action against the Department of
Public Works, restraining them from such acquisition on the ground of public trust
doctrine. Decide whether the action of five citizens is sustainable or not with the help
of case law.
4. A PIL was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by XY Samiti, a NGO,
working for the rights of the adivasis and tribal people in the remote area of State of U.P.
The main grievance of NGO was that the Adivasis and other backward people (tribal)
forest dwellers) were using forests as their habitat and means of livelihood. Part of the
land was declared as reserved forest and in respect of other part, the State Government of
U.P. had initiated acquisition processings for the purposes of establishing a super thermal
plant for generation of electricity. The NGO contended that the acquisition processings be
stopped as it violates Article 21 of the Constitution and damages the ecology of the area.
However, the State Government contended that for industrial growth and improved living
facilities, there is a great demand for electricity. Decide the competing claims of the
parties with the help of judicial pronouncements.
5. (i) The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) prepared a development scheme wherein
an area was kept for being developed as a recreational park. Subsequently, the
Chairman of DDA ordered that the area be allotted for the construction of a nursery
school. Discuss the legality of Chairman’s order in light of Article 14 of the
Constitution and ecological concerns.
(ii) “The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 makes it obligatory for the State Government
to obtain permission of the Central Government for use of forest land for non-forest
purpose.” Discuss with the help of case law.
6. A PIL was filed in the Supreme Court, by Gram Samaj Samiti, a NGO, seeking protection
of ecologically fragile coastal area especially to deal with shrimp culture industry. While
hearing the petition, the Supreme Court directed the Central Government to constitute an
‘authority’ under Section 3(3) of Environmental Protection Act, 1986 with all necessary
powers. Discuss whether the Supreme Court can direct for the constitution of statutory.
Also discuss the important provisions of E.P. Act 1986 and decided cases.
 x

7. The State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) issued directions to M/s. Z Industries for
ensuring proper treatment and storage of effluents in lagoons. Some of the directions were
not complied with by M/s Z Industries and as a result some effluent reached river Palav
and polluted its water. Despite enough time given by SPCB, no remedial steps were taken
by the M/s Z Industries. The SPCB directed the closure of industry under Section 33A of
Water Act, 1974. Discuss the legality of the order by highlighting the important
provisions of Water Act, 1974.
8. M/s XY Chemical Ltd., a private sector undertaking, was engaged in the manufacture of
ammonia, a hazardous chemical. The ammonia was stored in a storage tank having a
capacity of 10,000 tons. However, on 13th January, 2007, there was leakage of ammonia
from the storage tank, killing 200 people, both amongst the workmen and public and
causing environmental degradation. Rohit, a public-spirited citizen, approaches you (an
environmental law expert) to file a PIL before the Supreme Court of India. Advise and
discuss the relevant legal principles (statutory and case law) that strengthen your case
before the Supreme Court.
*****
LL.B. V Term (Supplementary) Examinations, May-June, 2009
Note: Attempt five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.
All questions carry equal marks.
1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:
(a) Composition of National Environmental Appellate Authority;
(b) Principle to determine compensation for immediate relief in environmental cases;
(c) Convention on Access to Information;
(d) Statutory principle of ‘no fault’ liability;
(e) Concept of environment.
2. The underground water of a village turns yellow and becomes unfit for consumption on
account of storage of certain hazardous chemicals by companies producing chemicals like
oleum and acid.
Discuss the principles of law that would apply against the polluters to restore the
quality of water and also protect the villagers affected by the above activity?
3. Discuss the decisions of the Supreme Court on the following issues:
(a) Closure of polluting industries in Delhi; (b) Ship-breaking activities in India.
4. Discuss the concept of sustainable development incorporated in multilateral documents
on environment and recognized by the Indian courts.
5. Describe the constitution and powers of the Central Pollution Control Board.
The Central Government passes an order superseding the Central Pollution Control
Board on the ground that it had persistently made default in the performance of its
functions. Is the supersession valid on this ground? Mention the grounds, if any, on the
basis of which the Board can challenge the order.
 xi

6. A citizen’s forum complained to a magistrate that on account of pollution caused by un-

treated industrial discharges in the canal adjoining residential houses, a very grave
situation had arisen leading to great public nuisance. The magistrate issues orders
directing the closure of the industries responsible for causing pollution. The owners of
industries challenge the order on the ground of jurisdiction of the magistrate. Decide.
7. What primary causes were pointed out by the Supreme court which caused pollution of
river Ganga at Kanpur? Discuss the directions passed by the court in making Ganga
pollution-free? What is the state of those directions at present?
8. Describe statutory provisions relating to hazardous substances. What principles were laid
down by the Supreme Court to control damage resulting from the leakage of these
substances?

LL.B. V Term

Environmental Law

Cases Selected and Edited by

S.N. Singh
Gurdip Singh
Niraj Kumar
 xii

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI-110 007
July, 2009