KSLU Solved Question Papers
Environmental Law
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 10
2012 Dec Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 10 Environmental Law 2012 Dec Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2012 Dec examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2012 Dec examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2012 Dec examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 20 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B. (1) Answer all 5 Questions. (2) One essay type and one short question or problem from each Unit have to be attempted, which is referred as Part (a) and (b) in all the Units. (3) Figures to the right indicate marks. (4) Answers should be written either in English or Kannada completely.
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1
Unit I
(a)What is sustainable development ? Explain the salient principles of sustainable development.[15]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the meaning of sustainable development (the Brundtland definition, its two key ideas, the three pillars); how the concept grew (Stockholm, Brundtland, Rio, Johannesburg, the SDGs); the salient principles as listed by the Supreme Court in Vellore, each explained with a case: inter-generational equity, use and conservation of resources, environmental protection, the precautionary principle, the polluter pays principle, the duty to assist and co-operate, eradication of poverty, and financial assistance to developing countries; the principles Indian law adds (public trust, impact assessment and participation, common but differentiated responsibilities); its legal status in India (Article 21; NGT Act s.20); the criticism; and a conclusion.
Meaning
Sustainable development is "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs". This is the definition given in Our Common Future (1987), the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland.
The report stresses two ideas within it:
- needs, especially the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and
- limits, imposed by technology and social organisation on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.
It rests on three pillars: economic growth, social equity and environmental protection. Development that serves only one of them is not sustainable. In Indian judgments it is called a balancing concept between ecology and development.
How the concept grew
| Year | Step |
|---|---|
| 1972 | Stockholm: resources to be kept for present and future generations |
| 1987 | Brundtland Report: the definition |
| 1992 | Rio: Principles 3 and 4 make it the organising idea; Agenda 21 |
| Year | Step |
|---|---|
| 2002 | Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development |
| 2015 | The 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda |
The salient principles
In Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715, tanneries in Tamil Nadu were polluting the Palar river. The Supreme Court held that sustainable development is part of customary international law and of Indian law. Drawing on the Brundtland Report and other instruments, it listed its salient principles:
1. Inter-generational equity. Each generation holds natural resources in trust for the next and must not exhaust them. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products, AIR 1996 SC 149, applied it. Katha factories had been approved without checking whether the khair forests could supply them. The Court said the present generation has no right to use up all the forests and leave nothing for the future.
2. Use and conservation of natural resources. Renewable resources should be used no faster than they regenerate, and non-renewable ones prudently. In Goa Foundation v. Union of India, (2014) 6 SCC 590, the Court capped iron ore extraction in Goa pending an expert study. It also set up a permanent fund from sale proceeds for future generations.
3. Environmental protection. Protection must be part of development, not an afterthought (Rio Principle 4). In Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board v. C. Kenchappa, AIR 2006 SC 2038, village land was acquired for industry near Bengaluru. The Court adopted the Brundtland definition. It required environmental assessment before land is acquired for industry, and Board clearance before allotment.
4. The precautionary principle. Measures must anticipate and prevent harm. Lack of scientific certainty is no reason to delay them, and the burden of proof is on the developer to show the activity is benign. In A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu, AIR 1999 SC 812, a plant was proposed near Hyderabad's drinking water lakes. The Court applied the principle and put the burden on the industry.
5. The polluter pays principle. The polluter must pay compensation to victims and the cost of restoring the environment. In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 1446 (the Bichhri case), chemical units poisoned a village's wells. They were made to pay for remedying the soil and water.
6. The obligation to assist and co-operate. States must work together on shared problems, such as climate change and transboundary pollution, and share knowledge and technology. The ozone treaties are the best example. Under the Montreal Protocol of 1987, a fund helped developing countries, India among them, to replace ozone-depleting chemicals. Within India, co-operation between the Centre, the States and the Boards is required by section 3(2)(i) of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986.
7. Eradication of poverty. Poverty forces people to over-use forests and land, and degradation deepens poverty. Development must lift the poor, as Rio Principle 5 requires. Indian law reflects this when it recognises the rights of forest dwellers under the Forest Rights Act 2006. It also requires the State to provide fuel and fodder to people affected by a new sanctuary.
8. Financial assistance to developing countries. Richer countries should provide money and technology so that poorer ones can develop cleanly. This follows from their greater share in causing global harm. The Climate Change Convention and the Paris Agreement both rest on such support, though the promised sums have often fallen short.
The Court called the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle "essential features" of sustainable development. It also held that, as part of customary international law not contrary to Indian law, these principles bind Indian courts without any new statute.
Principles Indian law adds
- The public trust doctrine. In M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (1997) 1 SCC 388, a motel had been leased forest land on the Beas and diverted the river. The Court held the State a trustee of natural resources and cancelled the lease.
- Impact assessment and public participation. Prior environmental clearance with a public hearing under the EIA Notification 2006 gives effect to Rio Principles 10 and 17. In Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India, AIRONLINE 2019 SC 318, the clearance for an airport in Goa rested on a study that hid forests and eco-sensitive features. The Court suspended it and sent it back for proper appraisal.
- Common but differentiated responsibilities, India's position in climate negotiations.
A worked example
A State wants to mine iron ore from a forested hill above farming villages. Sustainable development does not forbid the mine. It asks whether the ore can be taken at a rate the land and water can bear. It asks whether a study done in advance shows the harm (precaution). It asks whether the miner will pay for restoring the hill and the wells (polluter pays). It asks whether villagers get a share of the benefits (poverty eradication). It also asks whether part of the revenue is saved for those who come later (inter-generational equity). If these answers are yes, the mine is sustainable; if not, it is not.
Legal status in India
The courts have read sustainable development into Article 21. In N.D. Jayal v. Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 867, a case on the Tehri dam, the Court held the right to environment and the right to development both fundamental rights. Sustainable development is therefore part of the right to life. Parliament then wrote it into section 20 of the National Green Tribunal Act 2010. The Tribunal must apply sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle.
Criticism
- Vagueness. Both sides of a dispute invoke it, and it can be used to justify almost any project.
- Development often wins. In the Narmada case the dam went ahead in stages, with conditions.
- Measurement. It is hard to know when use becomes over-use.
- International promises of money and technology have largely not been kept.
- Weak institutions. The principles depend on honest impact studies and active Boards, both often lacking in practice.
Conclusion. Sustainable development means meeting present needs without harming the ability of future generations to meet theirs, balancing growth, equity and protection. Vellore listed its salient principles: inter-generational equity, conservation of resources, environmental protection, precaution, polluter pays, co-operation, poverty eradication and financial assistance. Indian courts have applied each, from Ganesh Wood Products to Bichhri, and added the public trust and impact assessment. N.D. Jayal made it part of Article 21, and section 20 of the NGT Act 2010 makes it binding on the Tribunal.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 10 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.