KSLU Solved Question Papers
Environmental Law
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 10
2015 Dec Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 10 Environmental Law 2015 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 2015 Dec examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2015 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 2015 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 · 13 questions answered
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.
Q1Explain the role of public interest litigation in environmental protection.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: what public interest litigation (PIL) is and why it arose; its foundations (relaxed standing and letters as petitions in S.P. Gupta; Articles 32, 226 and 21; a non-adversarial procedure); its role in environmental protection, function by function, each with a case: opening the courts to the voiceless (Rural Litigation), making authorities do their duty (Kanpur tanneries, Almitra Patel), creating environmental principles (Oleum, Vellore, Kamal Nath), fact-finding through experts (Taj Trapezium), time-bound directions (Delhi vehicles), continuing supervision and new institutions (Godavarman), compensation and restoration (Bichhri); its limits (Subhash Kumar, Narmada); the National Green Tribunal; a table; and a conclusion.
What PIL is
Public interest litigation is litigation in a court for the protection of the public interest. It is brought not by the person directly injured, but by any public-spirited person or group. They act for those who cannot come to court themselves. In India it grew in the late 1970s and 1980s, led by Justices P.N. Bhagwati and V.R. Krishna Iyer. Its aim was to bring justice to the poor and the voiceless.
The environment needed PIL more than most fields. Pollution harms large numbers of people, each a little, and often harms nobody in particular, such as a river, a forest or the air. The victims are usually poor and unorganised, while the polluters are powerful. Without PIL, many environmental wrongs would have had no plaintiff at all.
Its foundations
1. Relaxed standing. S.P. Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149. Lawyers challenged the transfer and appointment of judges, and it was objected that they had no standing. The Supreme Court held that where a public injury is caused, any member of the public acting bona fide and having sufficient interest can sue. That person must not be "a mere busy-body or a meddlesome interloper". The injured may be unable to come to court because of poverty or disability. Then any member of the public may move the High Court or the Supreme Court for them. The Court also said that "procedure is but a handmaiden of justice", so it would treat a letter as a writ petition.
2. Constitutional basis. PIL is filed under Article 32 in the Supreme Court or Article 226 in a High Court. The courts read the right to life in Article 21 to include a healthy environment, which gives environmental PIL its substance.
3. A different procedure. PIL is not a contest between two parties. The court is inquisitorial. It appoints commissions and expert committees, calls for reports, and gives directions to Governments and agencies.
Its role in environmental protection
1. Opening the courts to the voiceless.
Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1985 SC 652. A letter from an organisation in Dehradun complained of limestone quarrying that was causing landslides and drying springs in the Doon Valley. The Supreme Court treated the letter as a writ petition, appointed an expert committee and closed the most damaging quarries. It was the first major environmental PIL.
2. Making authorities do their duty.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (the Kanpur tanneries case), AIR 1988 SC 1037. A lawyer petitioned about tanneries near Kanpur pouring untreated effluent into the Ganga. The Supreme Court held that a tannery's financial capacity was irrelevant. Those that would not set up primary treatment plants had to close, and the Governments and local authority were directed to act.
Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 1256. A citizen petitioned about garbage dumped into the Yamuna and on open land in Delhi. The Court held municipal bodies bound to keep filth from lying strewn in public places and directed proper waste management.
3. Creating environmental principles.
- Absolute liability. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (the Oleum Gas Leak case), AIR 1987 SC 1086. In a PIL about a Shriram chemical unit in Delhi, after oleum gas escaped, the Court laid down absolute liability for hazardous industries.
- Sustainable development, precaution and polluter pays. Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715. A citizens' forum challenged tannery pollution of the Palar river. The Court held these principles part of Indian law.
- Public trust. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (1997) 1 SCC 388. Acting on a newspaper report about a motel diverting the Beas, the Court adopted the public trust doctrine.
4. Fact-finding through experts.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (the Taj Trapezium case), AIR 1997 SC 734. NEERI and an expert committee reported that sulphur dioxide from nearby industries was damaging the Taj Mahal. Relying on them, the Court directed 292 industries to switch to natural gas or relocate.
5. Time-bound directions.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (the vehicular pollution order of 28 July 1998), AIR 1998 SC 2963. Finding that the authorities had done almost nothing about Delhi's air, the Court itself fixed dates. Old commercial vehicles were to go, and public transport was to move to a single clean fuel.
6. Continuing supervision and new institutions.
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 1228. A petition about tree felling in the Nilgiris became a continuing case on all India's forests. The Court gave "forest" its dictionary meaning and suspended non-forest activity without central approval. The case has stayed open for decades, with the Court passing orders as problems arise.
7. Compensation and restoration.
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (the Bichhri case), AIR 1996 SC 1446. An environmental group petitioned about chemical units whose sludge poisoned the wells of Bichhri. The Court made them pay the cost of restoring the soil and water.
The roles at a glance
| Role | Case |
|---|---|
| Access for the voiceless | Rural Litigation |
| Enforcing duties | Kanpur tanneries, Almitra Patel |
| New principles | Oleum, Vellore, Kamal Nath |
| Expert fact-finding | Taj Trapezium |
| Time-bound directions | Delhi vehicles, 1998 |
| Continuing supervision | Godavarman |
| Restoration and compensation | Bichhri |
How an environmental PIL works in practice
- Who files. A citizen, a lawyer, an environmental group or a residents' association, acting in good faith.
- Where. The High Court under Article 226 for local problems, or the Supreme Court under Article 32 for national ones.
- What is pleaded. The violation of Article 21 and of the statutory duties of the authorities, such as a Pollution Control Board or a municipality.
- What relief is sought. Mandamus to the authorities, closure or regulation of the polluter, an expert committee, restoration, and compensation.
- What the court does. It issues notice to the Governments and agencies, appoints commissioners or experts, and passes interim directions. It often keeps the case open until compliance.
Limits and misuse
- Private motives. Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 420. A petitioner alleged that collieries were polluting the Bokaro river. The Court declared the right to pollution-free water and air under Article 21. But it dismissed the petition, because it was filed to serve a private business grudge. PIL cannot be a weapon for personal vendetta.
- Policy and expertise. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 3751. Challenging the Sardar Sarovar dam, the petitioners sought to stop construction. The majority held the challenge to the clearance barred by delay. It said a court will not sit in appeal over a policy decision on a large project once the Government has applied its mind. Construction was allowed in step with relief and rehabilitation.
- Overreach. Critics say continuing mandamus turns judges into administrators.
- Delay and non-compliance. Orders are often ignored for years.
The National Green Tribunal
Since the National Green Tribunal Act 2010, much environmental litigation goes to the Tribunal. Under section 18(2)(e) any person aggrieved, including a representative body, may apply to it. PIL in the constitutional courts remains available for the larger questions.
Conclusion. PIL relaxed standing and procedure (S.P. Gupta) and so opened the courts to people who could not come themselves (Rural Litigation). Through it the courts made authorities do their duty (Kanpur tanneries, Almitra Patel). They created absolute liability, sustainable development and the public trust (Oleum, Vellore, Kamal Nath). They used experts and fixed deadlines (Taj, Delhi 1998), supervised forests (Godavarman) and made polluters pay (Bichhri). It must be guarded against private misuse and overreach (Subhash Kumar, Narmada). It remains the main engine of Indian environmental law.
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.