Published on: 30th December 2024
Authored by: Tejaswinee Mohanty
SOA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF LAW
FACTS:
[1] An NGO called the “Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum” filed a public interest petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that 900 tyrannies located in five districts of Tamil Nadu were releasing untreated sewage water, which was severely polluting the land and water. The primary water source for the locals, the Palar River, receives the untreated sewage before it is released into open spaces, agricultural lands, and waterways.
It was claimed that this untreated sewage discharge had contaminated the whole water surface, including the subsurface, making water unavailable to the locals.
According to a survey carried out by the Tamilnadu Agricultural University Research Centre, the excessive use of chemicals and dyes has led to the spoilage of soil quality and contamination of groundwater, rendering over 35,000 hectares of agricultural land in the tanneries belt unsuitable for agriculture either entirely or partially. Out of 467 wells, about 350 were contaminated. It was also mentioned that just 443 of the 584 tanneries had filed for the board’s approval.
The written petition was submitted in support of a pollution-free environment under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, concentrating on two global themes associated with sustainable development: The polluter pays principle entails holding responsible parties accountable for their actions that result in pollution and holding them liable for whatever damages they cause to the environment. The court requested that the authorities determine how much the polluter must pay in compensation to the persons it hurt and the environment. If the polluter does not refund the money, the court has the authority to close down the industry. The precautionary principle states that any damage done to the environment or to human beings should be immediately protected against before any scientific evidence of a risk is found.
ISSUES:
Is it legal for the tanneries to keep operating at the expense of people’s lives and the health of the environment around them?
CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT:
The appellant contended that the discharge of raw sewage by tanneries had resulted in the degradation and contamination of the entire river, farmlands, wells, and soil quality. Furthermore, it was claimed that the excessive production of hazardous tannery effluents and the fact that mixing one kilogram of leather requires about 35 liters of water resulted in a lack of drinking water.
It was further claimed that the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and the Tamil Nadu government had ordered the tanneries to establish either an effluent treatment facility or that the government would pay for its installation, a claim that had been made in vain for the previous ten years.
[2] The National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERRI) has been ordered by the court to investigate the establishment and development of treatment plants. According to the NEERI’s study, out of 30 tannery sites inspected, only 7 have treatment facilities operating on them. Along with providing research reports on the tannery industries, their pollution emissions, maintenance records, and government notifications regarding the necessary action, MC Mehta has also helped the learned counsel. The respondent’s knowledgeable attorney has objected, claiming that the TN Board’s TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) correction was unjustified. The board’s requirements were demonstrated to be reasonable in the report that they filed, and the court ordered NEERI to investigate the standards.
CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT:
The attorneys for the tanneries argued that the Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) restrictions set by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board were unreasonable.
However, the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) was invited by the court on April 9, 1996, to look into and offer advice on this issue. The Board’s standards were confirmed as reasonable by the NEERI review.
Environment and Forests (MEF) does not yet have complete models for the flow of sulfates, chlorides, and total dissolved solids (TDS) into inland surface waters. The specific State Pollution Control Boards decide whether to implement these suggestions based on a variety of factors, including the specifics of the site. The previously cited factors justify the TNPCB recommendations. The TNPCB-approved guidelines for the release of inland surface water for tannery wastewater can be met economically by using appropriate embedded control gauges in tanning operations and typically designed and functional wastewater treatment facilities (ETPs and CETPs).
JUDGMENT:
The court concluded that because the leather sector creates jobs for citizens and generates foreign cash, it is a vital component of the country’s development. Development and environmental protection, however, must proceed in harmony. These tanneries endanger human lives and harm the environment. Tanneries were ordered by the supreme court to cease operations until pollution control technology was installed. If the Tamil Nadu Pollution Board grants them approval after installation, they can carry on with their task. The court suggested that MC Mehta be awarded Rs 50,000 in recognition of his noteworthy work. Establishing green benches is necessary to improve quick protection against environmental problems.
As far as I can see, the Environment Act provides useful provisions for limiting pollution. I acknowledge that the major objective for the Act is to provide power or authority under Section 3(3) of the Act with sufficient force to regulate pollution and safeguard the environment. It is unfortunate that no authority has been formed by the Central Government yet. The work that is needed to be completed by an expert under Section 3(3) read with other sections of the Act is being completed by the Apex Court and other courts around the country.
CONCLUSION:
[3] We have been provided with expert counsel for the tanneries that have been shuttered in connection with the aforementioned request, in compliance with the present Court’s Order dated April 9, 1996. It has come to our notice that several tanneries, even though they were shut down, installed special pollution control systems. We have also been informed that some of the tanneries have their own pollution control systems installed and are associated with CETPs. We’ve been made aware of a few irregularities. Either way, we suggested a coordinated plan to welcome these tanneries on trains.
We make it clear that no tannery will be allowed to reopen unless this Court determines that these tanneries have installed the required contamination control devices, either separately or collectively. Consequently, we are forced to rely on the recommendations made by technical specialists like Pollution Control Boards or NEERI. The Court conducted a mutual assessment of the area on a war footing basis in collaboration with the Central Contamination Control Board and the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.
Tanneries have two options for contacting pollution control boards: they can do it directly, through educated understanding, or by presenting proof that the relevant pollution control systems have been installed or constructed in their specific units. We direct that, by May 6, 1996, the concerned Pollution Control Boards document a report summarizing their evaluation of the units as quickly as feasible.
The Court further decided that units may apply to the Board after they have finished the devices if they are unable to produce the required therapeutic devices in the allotted period.
The boards established review committees, and the costs of those committees would be met by the North Arcot District, Chennai MGR District Association, and other Tanner associations.
Upon examining the research, the Supreme Court rendered its ruling, endeavoring to preserve equilibrium between necessity and advancement.
The Court recognized that these Indian tanneries employ a sizable workforce and are a significant source of foreign exchange. In addition, it destroys the environment and endangers everyone’s health. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner and ordered all tanneries to reimburse the collector’s office for a fine of Rs. 10,000.
In addition, the Court ordered the State of Tamil Nadu to provide Mr. M. C. Mehta Rs. 50,000 as a reward for his work promoting environmental security. In order to address issues pertaining to environmental preservation and to hasten the settlement of environmental disputes, the Court has lately placed emphasis on the creation of Green Benches in India.
References:
[1] LEGALBITES, https://www.legalbites.in/environment-law/case-analysis-vellore-citizens-welfare-forum-v-union-of-india-and-ors-1996-965278 ,( last visited Oct 16, 2024)
[2] JUDICATEME, https://judicateme.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Vellore-Citizens-Welfare-Forum-v.-Union-of-India_JudicateMe.pdf , (last visited Oct 16,2024)
[3] LAWDOCS, https://www.lawdocs.in/listen-podcast/constitutional-case-law/vellore-citizens-welfare-forum-v-uoi , (last visited OCT 16,2024)
