Sl. No.

Case Title Case Citation

Save Mon Region M.A. No. 104 of 2012

Federation & Anr vs Union (Arising out of Appeal No.
Of India & Ors 39 of 2012)

Samir Mehta v Union of IndiaMANU/GT/0104/2016

Rural Litigation and

Entitlement Kendra,
Dehradun vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh AIR 1987 SC 2187
4

ndian Council for Enviro-

legal Action v. Union of
India (1996) 3 SCC 212.

Indian Council for Enviro-

Legal Action vs. Union of
India AIR 1999 SC 1502
6

T. N. Godavarman
Tirumulkpad v. Union of
India (AIR 1997 SC 1228)

MC Mehta v. Union of India

(1987) – The Taj Trapezium
Case AIR 1997 2 SCC 353

Rural Litigation and

Entitlement Kendra,
Dehradun v. State of Uttar
Pradesh (1985) 1989 AIR 594
 Significance of the case

The case highlights the balance between

development and ecological conservation,
focusing on protecting endangered species
like the Black-necked Crane. It reinforces
the precautionary principle in environmental
decision-making. The judgment serves as a
precedent for safeguarding biodiversity in
ecologically sensitive areas.

The case highlights the application of the

"Polluter Pays" principle in addressing
marine pollution and environmental
negligence. It underscores the accountability
of private entities for environmental harm
caused by their operations. The judgment
serves as a precedent for enforcing
compliance with environmental laws and
due diligence in maritime activities.

The case marked a pivotal role for NGOs in

environmental litigation in India. Rural
Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK),
an NGO, filed the case on behalf of affected
communities, showcasing the power of
public interest litigation (PIL). The case
emphasized the responsibility of citizens
and organizations in safeguarding
environmental rights for sustainable
development.
The Bichhri case is a landmark in Indian
environmental law, showcasing the
transformative role of Public Interest
Litigation (PIL) in addressing environmental
harm. It highlighted the Supreme Court's
proactive stance in protecting the
fundamental right to a clean environment
under Article 21. The application of the
“Polluter Pays Principle” and “absolute
liability” established critical precedents for
holding industries accountable for
environmental degradation.

The case marked a milestone in

environmental law by enforcing the "Polluter
Pays Principle" and emphasizing the
necessity of Environmental Impact
Assessments (EIA). It established the
judiciary's proactive role in protecting
coastal ecosystems and ensuring
sustainable development. The judgment
demonstrated how judicial intervention can
compel states to prioritize environmental
governance and resource conservation.
This is a landmark judgment that redefined
forest conservation in India. It established
the judiciary's role in enforcing the Forest
(Conservation) Act, ensuring compliance
with sustainable development principles.
The judgment highlighted the failure of the
executive in implementing forest laws,
compelling the judiciary to assume a
supervisory role. It also set a precedent for
judicial activism in protecting natural
resources.

The Taj Trapezium Case is a landmark in

Indian environmental law, demonstrating
how PILs can protect both the environment
and cultural heritage. The case emphasized
the interconnection between environmental
degradation and damage to historical
monuments. It led to the establishment of
the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ), a regulated
area around the Taj Mahal, showcasing the
judiciary's proactive role in environmental
preservation

The case of *Rural Litigation and

Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of
Uttar Pradesh* was the first environmental
PIL in India and laid the foundation for
environmental jurisprudence. It
demonstrated the judiciary's proactive role
in safeguarding the environment and natural
resources, emphasizing sustainable
development and ecological preservation
over unregulated economic activities.
 Decision/Judgement Summary Reason for the decision

The clearance was suspended due

The NGT suspended the hydro project’s to procedural lapses and inadequate
environmental clearance and directed the environmental impact assessments.
EAC to reassess its ecological impact. The The project posed significant threats
Ministry of Environment was instructed to to critical habitats of endangered
conduct a study on protecting the Black- species. The tribunal emphasized
necked Crane. The decision prioritized the need for a thorough, science-
compliance with environmental laws and based evaluation before permitting
biodiversity conservation. such projects.

The sinking of M.V. Rak caused

The NGT held the respondents liable for severe marine pollution, including a
negligence and non-compliance with pre- thick oil film and ecological damage.
voyage due diligence requirements. It The respondents failed to ensure
directed the payment of substantial proper due diligence and safe
environmental compensation to the Ministry operation of the ship. The tribunal
of Shipping. The tribunal emphasized the invoked the "Polluter Pays" principle
need for strict accountability in cases of to ensure accountability and
environmental harm. environmental restoration.

The Court found that limestone

quarrying caused severe ecological
damage, violating the constitutional
The Supreme Court, acting on the PIL filed right to a healthy environment under
by RLEK, ordered the closure of ecologically Article 21. RLEK's role was
harmful limestone quarries in the Doon instrumental in bringing evidence
Valley. The judgment prioritized and the concerns of local
environmental preservation over unregulated communities to light, showcasing
economic activity, setting a precedent for how NGOs can amplify public
judicial intervention in environmental grievances for environmental
protection. justice.
 The Court recognized the severe
In 1996, the Supreme Court held the rogue groundwater and soil pollution
industries absolutely liable for environmental caused by the toxic waste
harm caused in Bichhri village, invoking the generated by industries operating
“Polluter Pays Principle.” It ordered industries without proper clearances. The
to pay ₹37.38 crores for environmental judgment was rooted in
remediation and ₹34.28 lakhs as safeguarding the villagers' right to
compensation to affected villagers. The Court life under Article 21. The decision
directed the closure of all polluting industries was guided by the principles of
in the area and emphasized the need for environmental justice, ensuring
environmental courts, eventually leading to industries bore the cost of remedial
the establishment of the National Green measures to restore the polluted
Tribunal. area.

The Court recognized the severe

environmental degradation caused
by unregulated industrial and
construction activities along the
coastline. It emphasized that
Justice Jeevan Reddy held that polluters are polluting entities must be held
financially responsible for preventing or accountable to safeguard public
remedying environmental damage caused by health and ecological balance. The
their activities. The Court set a time limit for judgment reinforced the
coastal states to prepare Coastal Zone constitutional right to a healthy
Management Plans and banned industrial environment under Article 21 and
and construction activities within 500 meters ensured that economic growth does
of the High Tide Line, aiming to protect the not come at the expense of
coastal environment. environmental sustainability
 The Court acted in response to
widespread deforestation,
The Supreme Court banned tree felling in environmental degradation, and
Arunachal Pradesh and suspended such non-compliance with forest
activities in other states without approved conservation laws. It sought to
working plans. It ordered the closure of safeguard the ecological balance by
unlicensed sawmills and veneer and plywood ensuring adherence to sustainable
industries in various states, including development principles and the
Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. The Court Forest (Conservation) Act. The
imposed strict restrictions on forest-related judgment addressed the failure of
activities and mandated state governments to the executive in enforcing
report on forest use and sawmill operations. It environmental laws, highlighting the
constituted a committee to oversee the urgency of judicial intervention to
implementation of its orders, particularly in protect forests and natural
the northeastern states. resources.

The Court recognized that air

pollution from nearby industries,
particularly the release of sulfur
The Supreme Court ruled that industries dioxide, was corroding the white
causing air pollution around the Taj Mahal marble of the Taj Mahal. It held that
must either switch to cleaner technologies or the environmental harm was a
relocate outside the Taj Trapezium Zone. The violation of Article 21, which
Court emphasized the importance of guarantees the right to a healthy
protecting the Taj Mahal as a global heritage environment. The judgment aimed
site and ordered strict regulations on to balance industrial activity with the
industrial emissions in the region to prevent preservation of cultural and
further damage. environmental heritage.

The Court found that limestone

quarrying had caused irreversible
ecological damage, including
deforestation, soil erosion, and
The Supreme Court ordered the closure of groundwater depletion, posing a
several limestone quarries in the Doon threat to the environment and public
Valley, recognizing their detrimental impact health. It upheld the fundamental
on the environment. The Court emphasized right to a clean and healthy
the principle that the conservation of natural environment under Article 21 and
resources is essential for future generations underscored the need for judicial
and must take precedence over short-term intervention to prevent irreversible
economic benefits. ecological harm.
 Remarks

this case highlights NGT'S

role in safeguarding the
environment

this case highlights NGT'S role

in safeguarding the
environment

The case marked a pivotal role

for NGOs in environmental
litigation in India
The case marked a pivotal role
for NGOs in environmental
litigation in India

this case deals with the judicial

intervention over
environmental issues
this case deals with the judicial
intervention over
environmental issues

this case demonstrates

how PIL acts as a
foundation for
environmental
jurisprudence

this case demonstrates

how PIL acts as a
foundation for
environmental
jurisprudence