LLM Group 6 Environment and Legal Order Environmental Legislations 2018 Question Paper with Solutions

For full marks, cover: the question says "any two" but prints only two notes, so both must be written and the 25 marks are shared between them. For the judiciary note, organise by kind of pollution (air, water, soil, industrial hazard, noise) and explain at least one case in full, together with a limit on judicial power. For the public note, show the concrete roles the public plays and the legal provisions that support each, with a case where citizens or villagers protected a resource. Close each note with a line of evaluation.

Noise and constitutional rights. In Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Association, (2000) 7 SCC 282, residents complained that a church's prayers with loudspeakers and drums were a nuisance to the colony. The Supreme Court held that no religion requires prayers to disturb the peace of others through amplifiers or drums, that in a civilised society activities which disturb old or infirm persons, students or children cannot be permitted in the name of religion, and that such a practice cannot override the rights of others, including the right not to be disturbed. It upheld the direction to enforce the noise guidelines.

The limit: compensation needs proof of harm. In Deepak Nitrite Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 6 SCC 402, the Gujarat High Court had ordered every unit in an industrial estate that failed to meet the Board's standards to pay one per cent of its turnover as compensation, without finding what damage each had caused. The Supreme Court held that compensation in public law must rest on a finding that damage was actually caused, and sent the matter back to the High Court for that inquiry. Breach of a standard is not in itself damage; the judiciary's power to curb pollution must still be exercised on evidence.

(b) Public opinion and participation in environment protection

Environmental protection is not only a task for governments and regulators. The public, meaning affected communities, citizens, organisations, the press and consumers, protects the environment in ways the State cannot, because it is present everywhere, bears the harm directly and has no interest in overlooking it. Public opinion is the pressure the public generates; public participation is the legal space in which that pressure is heard. Together they give the public six practical roles.

Public opinion as a force. Public concern after the Bhopal gas leak of 1984 formed the background to the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; forest movements such as Chipko in the 1970s made forest protection a national issue; and press reports have repeatedly led courts and the National Green Tribunal to act on their own motion. The March 2020 draft of a new impact assessment notification attracted wide public objection and has not been finalised.

Participation that limited the loss of a common resource. In Intellectuals Forum, Tirupathi v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2006) 3 SCC 549, the State had alienated the beds of two ancient percolation and irrigation tanks at Tirupati, Avilala and Peruru, for house sites and an urban development scheme. A citizens' forum challenged the destruction of the tanks. The Supreme Court held that such tanks are community resources held by the State as trustee under the public trust doctrine, that authorities cannot alienate them in a way that injures the community's rights, and that government must protect historic water bodies consistently with sustainable development. The Court nevertheless declined to order the tanks restored, given the development already carried out, and directed measures to conserve what remained. An organised public, not a regulator, brought the loss of the tanks to law.

The roles at work: an illustration. Suppose a stone crusher begins operating beside a village school and its dust coats crops and classrooms. Villagers first act as watchdogs, photographing the dust and obtaining under the Right to Information Act, 2005 the unit's consent papers from the State Board. As participants, they object when the unit seeks a clearance for expansion. As litigants, they may move the Magistrate under section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, apply to the National Green Tribunal, or give sixty days' notice and complain under section 19(b) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. And as monitors, they check whether the dust suppression conditions later imposed are actually followed. No single role would succeed alone; together they make the law work.

Conditions for effective participation. Information must be accessible in time and in the local language; hearings must be genuinely open and recorded; objections must receive reasoned responses; exempted categories should be kept narrow; and petitions must be bona fide, since courts reject private grievances presented as public interest.