LLM Group 6 Environment and Legal Order Prevention and Control of Pollution 2022 Question Paper with Solutions

The definition, and the human being inside it

Pollution is the presence of a substance in water, air or land at a concentration that is, or tends to be, injurious. Every Indian statutory definition names the human being among those it protects. Section 2(e) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 speaks of water rendered harmful or injurious to public health or safety. Section 2(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 defines an air pollutant as a substance, including noise, present in such concentration as may be or tend to be injurious to human beings, other living creatures, plants, property or environment. Section 2(a) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 includes human beings within the very definition of environment.

That inclusion is not decorative. It means that injury to human health is, by itself, enough to make a discharge pollution in law, even before any harm to the wider ecosystem is shown, and it is what allowed the courts to treat pollution as an infringement of the right to life.

The kinds of pollution, by the route to the human body

Impact through the lungs: air pollution

Air pollution is the largest cause of pollution-related death in India. The India State-Level Disease Burden Initiative, reporting the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 in The Lancet Planetary Health in 2021, attributed 1.67 million deaths in India in 2019 to air pollution, 17.8 per cent of all deaths. Of these, 0.98 million were attributed to ambient particulate pollution and 0.61 million to household air pollution from burning solid fuels for cooking, a burden that falls chiefly on women and small children in the kitchen.

Fine particles, PM2.5, penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream, which is why the national standard notified on 18 November 2009 limits them to an annual average of 40 micrograms per cubic metre. The human cost in cities was recognised early. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1998) 6 SCC 63, decided on 28 July 1998, the Supreme Court, faced with a Government White Paper attributing seventy per cent of Delhi's air pollution to vehicles, fixed dates for removing old commercial vehicles and converting public transport to a single clean fuel, because the people of Delhi could not wait for the executive.

The worst contamination is local and man-made. In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, (1996) 3 SCC 212, decided on 13 February 1996, sludge from chemical units at Bichhri seeped into the aquifer and turned the village wells dark and unfit to drink. The Supreme Court held that the units were absolutely liable and that they must pay for restoring the soil and water on which the villagers' health depended.

Impact through the ears and nerves: noise

Noise harms hearing, raises stress, disturbs sleep and interferes with study and work. In Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Association, AIR 2000 SC 2773, (2000) 7 SCC 282, decided on 30 August 2000, residents complained of a church's loudspeakers and drums in a neighbourhood with a school and students preparing for examinations. The Supreme Court held that activities in the name of religion which disturb old or infirm persons, students or sleeping children cannot be permitted, and that no citizen can be coerced to hear what they do not wish to hear.

Impact in catastrophe

Oleum. On 4 December 1985 oleum gas escaped from a Shriram plant in a crowded part of Delhi, affecting workers and residents. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086, (1987) 1 SCC 395, the Supreme Court held that an enterprise carrying on a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community, and is absolutely liable for harm to the people around it without the defences available under the rule of strict liability.

Bhopal. The escape of methyl isocyanate from the Union Carbide plant at Bhopal in December 1984 killed and injured people in numbers disputed ever since. The claims were settled in February 1989 for 470 million US dollars. The settlement was upheld in Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 248, (1991) 4 SCC 584, with the declaration that the Union of India, as a welfare State, must make good any shortfall; and when the Union sought more compensation because the toll proved far higher, its curative petitions were dismissed on 14 March 2023. For the survivors, the human impact outlasted the legal remedy.

How the law recognises the human impact

The courts have built three bridges from human harm to legal remedy. First, the right to a healthy environment is part of the right to life: Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 420, (1991) 1 SCC 598, held that Article 21 includes the right to enjoy pollution-free water and air, and Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame, (1990) 1 SCC 520, counted a decent environment among the basic needs within that right. Second, the right to health is a fundamental right, as the asbestos case held. Third, hazardous enterprises are absolutely liable for the harm they do to people, as the Oleum case held, and victims of accidents with hazardous substances receive relief without proving fault under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991.