Essay on Environment and Indian Constitution

Here is your essay on Environment and Indian Constitution:

Indian constitution enumerated various rights for its citizens and Indian constitution is amongst the few in the world that contains specific provisions on environment protection.

Under these provisions constitution may not only adopt the protectionist policy but also provides for the improvement of polluted environment.

Environmental protection and improvement were explicitly incorporated into constitution by the Constitution (forty second Amendment) Act of 1976. The 42nd Amendment Act clearly spelt out in the amendment to the preamble of the concept of socialism.

Image Source: 185.26.182.219

The constitution being supreme law of the land shall be binding on not only the citizens and non-citizens but also on the state itself. The Constitution (forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 inserted in the constitution for the first time specific provisions to protect and improve the environment and in the sequel of this inserted part IV-A of the constitution which enumerates certain fundamental duties under Article 48-A to state as directive policy of state. And Article 51-A (g) fundamental duties of citizen.

According to Article 48-A:

It is the duty of the state to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.

Parliament has imposed a new constitutional obligation on the state by incorporating Art. 48-A in the constitution because of insertion of this article.

Forest, wildlife, which subjects were of state list were shifted to the subject of concurrent list and was a turning point and gave the centre also the power to legislate on forests.

According to Article 47 of the Indian Constitution improvement of public health are the primary duties of the state and to improve public health clear and healthy atmosphere is necessary, so it is the duty of the state for improvement of Public Health to first of all improve the quality of environment.

According to Article 252, Parliament has power to pass Legislation on request of state Legislatures after resolution on any subject and according to this Article Indian Parliament passed the “Environment Protection Act, 1986”.

The discussion over the problems creating environmental degradation by pollution and over-drawl of natural resources ended in this enactment of Parliament after the N.D. Tiwari Commission Report, (Commission that was constituted for giving recommendations about legislative measures and about setting up the administrative machinery for the preservation and protection of environment).

This Act defines well the concept of environment and pollution thereof, and also covers all the aspects, needed to be handled and control environmental pollution by Central Government by giving essential powers to the Government and strengthens its hand to implement environment policies and to enforce compliance thereof.

But in spite of all this effort for Central Government, the Environmental (Protection) Act 1986 is not up to expectations. It is comprehensive for the protection of environment and for the maintenance of ecological balance. Act is free from ambiguity, drawbacks and shortcomings. There are some provisions in the Act which will have to effects of obliterating the Act itself for all intents and purposes.

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981despite of the Wildlife Protection Act and the Indian Forest Act degradation of environment and wildlife is continued and all above legislations are feeble to cope with the problems of environment degradation and in the efforts of improvement of environment.

But with the expanding scope of judicial activism there is a check over environmental problems to some extent.

In early 1980’s the role of higher judiciary in India under-went a hot transformation. A new and radically different kind of cases altered the Legislation Landscape. Instead of being asked to resolve private dispute Supreme Court and High Court judges were asked to deal with Public Grievances over flagrant human right violation by state or to indicate the public policies embodied in statutes or constitutional provisions.

This new type of judicial activity is called as ‘PIL’, ‘Public Interest Litigate’ Right to clean and clear environment is the basic human right and so most of environmental action in India fall within this class such types of cases called Enviro-Judicial Remedies.

In Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (Dehradun) v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1985 SC 652) popularly called Dehradun Quarrying Case a large scale of pollution was caused by limestone quarries adversely affecting the safety and health of people living in the area (After consultation of Committee, Constituted by S.C.) Supreme Court ordered the closure of certain limestone quarries on the ground that they were seriously affecting the environment and also adversely affecting the safety and health of the people living in the area.

In M.C. Mehta and Other v. Union of India, (AIR 1986 S.C. 176) popularly called Shriram Gas Leak Case, S.C. directed the company to take necessary safety measures before starting the operation of the company and also directed the management to deposit a sum of 20 lakhs by way of security for payment of compensation of claim of the victim of alum gas leak, and a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs as bank guarantee to ensure compliance of the other of the court.

In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, it has been held that ‘PIL’ is maintainable for ensuring enjoyment of pollution free water and air which is included in the right of life under Article 21 of the constitution.

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1987) 4 SCC 463 S.C. ordered the closure of tanneries of Jajmau near Kanpur, Polluting Ganga. The matter brought to the notice of the court by the petitiance a social worker through ‘PIL’. In this case court directed that instead water and Environment Law are implemented. Government does not take any effective steps to stop grave public nuisance caused by tanneries at Jajmau and so court ordered the closure of tanneries in another case filed by M.C. Mehta for the pollution of Ganga River.

S.C. found that the Nagar Mahapalika of Kanpur had to bear major responsibility for the pollution of Ganga near Kanpur. The Court ordered all Municipalities and Nagar Mahapalika in U.P. along the Ganga River to take steps to prevent the polluting of the Ganga.

The pollution of Ganga River affecting the life, health ecology of the Ganga Action Plan. The Government as well as Parliament both had taken numerous steps to control the water pollution, but nothing substantial has been achieved. But the judgment of S.C. is worthy to tackle this problem.

In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996) 3 SCC 212 S.C. held that the respondents were responsible for all the damages to the soil, the Central Government had power to decide it, and from this case, the principle determined to fix remedial compensation that is ‘Polluter pays’ evolved by Supreme Court for repairing damages caused to environment or public safety from hazardous industries, or from any other thing.

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 735 (Tajmahal Pollution Case) In this case judge Kuldeep Singh (called green judge for his decision in pollution case) gives a verdict on the side of petitioner that 292 industries situated near Tajmahal are the main source of pollution and directed them to stop if they do not follow directions given by the court or otherwise they be reallocated alternative places in the industrial estate outside Taj Trapezium whenever such types of judgments delivered by our Supreme Court in ‘PIL’ cases it shows Supreme Court’s ingress into fields traditionally reserved for the executive.

Finding the executive response to be absent or deficient the Supreme Court has used the interim direction to influence the quality of administration, “making it more responsible than before to the constitutional ethic and law”.

Occasionally, the court has even created its own administrative machinery committees monitoring to remove environmental danger and to improve it for safety and security of its citizens and also to protection of environment. It is one of the great achievement of our constitution is field of protection of environment.

Our constitution has enumerated for us various rights. For our safety and improvement of health and so we should always remember that though we are endowed with many rights, as responsible citizens of our great country we are also required to perform several duties.

Expecting rights without performing duties is unethical and immoral and for that purpose under our constitution Article 51-A (g) deals with the fundamental duty to respect to environment it says “it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forest, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures”. Recent crackdown on Sand majia, fuel adulterators by Maharashtra Government shows the awareness being created in the executive.

Furthermore, the role of N.G.O’s in the field of environment protection cannot also be ignored. The N.G.Os had been contributing their share of work and had taken up various peoples movements examples of Green Peace, save the earth, “Ped Missies”, Chipco andolan of Sundarlal Bahuguna, cleaning of Yamuna, etc.

As our constitution gives us right of clean and clear environment and expand its scope “Right to life under Article 21” in return, it is also our duty to preserve and protect the environment and always try to improve the quality of environment as much as possible and for that purpose what is necessary is commitment.

Development that meets the needs of the present generation and also makes it easier for the future generations to meet their needs and so we all should always be aware of our duties towards environment protection and improvement. Expecting rights without performing duties is unethical and immoral so to being vigilant towards one’s duties then only we can say that, the concept of socialism of our constitution should be achieved.