50 Landmark Judgments on Environmental Law for CLAT PG

I. Constitutional Foundations and the Right to a Clean Environment

1. Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar : Herein, the Court interpreted Article 21 to include the right to clean water and air. However, since there was no public interest, the case was dismissed. 
2. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak) : After oleum leaked from a Delhi fertiliser plant, the Court dropped the exceptions in Rylands v. Fletcher and created absolute liability. An enterprise in a hazardous activity must pay for all harm it causes, in an amount that matches its size and capacity.
3. M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India : A case about the Great Indian Bustard and overhead power lines led the Court to recognise a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change. It placed that right within Articles 14 and 21.

II. Sustainable Development, Precautionary Principle, and Polluter Pays

1. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India:Tanneries in Tamil Nadu were poisoning the Palar river. The ruling revealed that the precautionary and polluter pays principles were already established as mandated by Indian law. The tanneries were directed to pay for their violations under the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986. 
2. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India :Chemical units at Bichhri village had left toxic sludge that contaminated the groundwater.The ruling helped in applying the principles of absolute liability. 
3. A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu : The Court explained the precautionary principle in detail and placed the burden on the developer to show that the activity is environmentally safe. It also urged the creation of environmental courts with expert members. provided a more detailed explanation of precautionary principle wherein the burden of environmental safety was put onto the developers.

III. Public Trust Doctrine and Protection of Natural Heritage

1. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath: A motel had interfered with the course of the Beas river. The Court brought the public trust doctrine into Indian law and held that the State cannot hand over rivers, forests, and similar resources for private commercial use.
2. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Taj Trapezium): The case involved industrial emissions causing discoloration of the Taj Mahal. The court mandated polluting industries in the Taj Trapezium area to change to natural gas or move their locations.
3. Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand : Residents suffered from open drains and stench. Using Section 133 of the CrPC, the Court ordered the municipality to build drains and held that a lack of funds does not excuse a failure of statutory duty.

IV. Forests, Wildlife, and Tribal Interests

1. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India :This continuing mandamus gave “forest” its dictionary meaning under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, whatever the ownership or classification. The Court has since supervised felling, mining, and forest land diversion.
2. Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar v. Union of India :The petition challenged mining inside the Sariska Tiger Reserve. The Court stopped the mining and held that work within a notified sanctuary must comply with wildlife and forest laws.
3. Pradeep Krishen v. Union of India :Pradeep Krishen v. Union of India (1996) 8 SCC 599. The case raised the issue of validity of a notification in Madhya Pradesh permitting local villagers to collect 'tendu' leaves and forest produce from sanctuaries and national parks. The Court held that commercialization is not supported by the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and directed that rights must be settled by the State.

V. Pollution Control, Clearances, and Green Tribunal Powers

1. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. v. Union of India :The Court ruled that Sterlite's smelter in Tuticorin was running without any legal consent; the Court quashed the order of closure imposed by the High Court, imposing a compensation amount of ₹100 crores based on the principle of the polluter pays.
2. Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Rohit Prajapati : The Court rejected ex post facto environmental clearance for projects that started before approval. Clearance must come first, or the precautionary principle is defeated.
3. Mantri Techzone Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation : The Court upheld the National Green Tribunal’s direction on buffer zones around Bengaluru’s lakes. It held that the Tribunal can require larger buffers than local planning rules provide.
4. In Re: Noise Pollution : The Court held that noise violates the right to life and that nobody has a fundamental right to make noise. It restricted loudspeakers at night, from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., with limited exceptions.

Keep Revising