#Envirommental landmark cases 👍.

-: ENVIRONMENTAL LAW LANDMARK CASES :-

1) "Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India" (Citation: MANU/SC/0686/1996):-
The Court introduced and recognized three key principles as part of Indian environmental law:
Precautionary Principle,Polluter Pays Principle,Sustainable Development principle
This judgment firmly established sustainable development as an integral part of Indian constitutional and environmental law.

2) "MC Mehta v. Union of India" (Ganga Pollution Case) (Citation: MANU/SC/0396/1987):-
The Court observed:
“Just like an industry which cannot pay minimum wages cannot be allowed to exist, a tannery which cannot set up a primary treatment plant cannot be permitted to continue.”
This case strengthened the principle that environmental protection takes precedence over industrial convenience.
3) "Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board v. MV Nayudu" (Citation: MANU/SC/2953/2000):-
The Court recognized the Precautionary Principle as an essential component of environmental law and emphasized that lack of scientific certainty cannot be used as a reason to permit environmentally harmful activities.

4) "S Jagannath v. Union of India" (Citation: AIR 1997 SC 811):-
The Supreme Court held that coastal ecosystems are fragile and must be protected from environmentally harmful commercial activities. The Court applied the Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle and ordered the closure of shrimp farms operating in ecologically sensitive areas.

5) "Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India" (Citation: MANU/SC/0837/2011):-
The Supreme Court applied the principle of Absolute Liability and held that industries engaged in hazardous activities are strictly liable for environmental damage, regardless of fault or negligence.

6) "MC Mehta v. Union of India" (Citation: MANU/SC/8530/2006):-
The Court held that industries engaged in hazardous activities have an absolute and non-delegable duty to ensure safety. If harm occurs, they are absolutely liable to compensate victims.

7) "Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of UP" (Citation: MANU/SC/0111/1986):-
The Supreme Court ordered closure of environmentally harmful mines and held that environmental protection is part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.

8) "Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar" (Citation: AIR 1991 SC 420):-
The Supreme Court held that the right to pollution-free water and air is part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21. However, the Court dismissed the petition because it was filed for personal business interests rather than public interest.

9) "Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India" (Citation: MANU/SC/0018/1992):-
This case involved illegal mining in the Sariska Tiger Reserve. The Supreme Court ordered immediate closure of mining activities and directed environmental restoration measures.

10) "Sachidanand Pandey v. State of West Bengal" (Citation: MANU/SC/0136/1987):-
This case involved construction of a hotel near a zoological park. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of balancing environmental protection with development.
The Court held that environmental considerations must be given due importance in developmental decisions.

11) "M. C. Mehta v. Union of India [Shri Ram Food and Fertilizers Case / Oleum Gas Leakage Case]:-
The court appreciated the petitioner Mr. M.C. Mehta for filing a number of PIL and ordered the Shri Ram Food and Fertilizers to pay Rs. 10,000 towards the costs.The court directed the Central Government to set up an Environmental Court.

12) " M. C. MEHTA v. Union Carbide Commission" :-
Supreme Court directed the UCC to pay sum of 470 Million U.S. Dollars i.e. Rs. 750 crore towards compensation to the victims for the full and final settlement in satisfaction of all past, present and future claims and the same was accepted by both the parties.

13) "Sachidanad Pandey v. State of West Bengal" :-
court at the same time also observed that the approach of the Taj Group of hotels has been credibly fair as they have given all the assurances to preserve the Zoo and its inmates. They also agreed to build a garden hotel keeping in view the ecology of the area and for the protection of the migratory birds.

14) "Rural Litigation Entitlement Kendra (RLEK) v. Union of India":-

The court directed the State to pay Rs. 10,000 to RLEK for their efforts and take steps towards restoration of the ecology.

15) "Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra" (1985):-
Highlighted the need for environmental balance by closing destructive limestone mining in Dehradun.......

Видео #Envirommental landmark cases 👍. канала LAW ZONE