Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India Judgment
- ByPravleen Kaur --
- 02 May 2025 --
- 0 Comments
I. Introduction
This case was a public interest litigation filed under Article 32 of the Constitution against the pollution caused by the discharge of untreated effluents from tanneries and other industries in the state of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner alleged that the tanneries were discharging untreated effluents into agricultural fields, roadsides, waterways, and open lands, ultimately polluting the river Palar, which was the main source of water supply for the residents of the area. [Paragraph 1]
II. Environmental Degradation Caused by Tanneries
The petition highlighted the severe environmental degradation caused by the tanneries in the state of Tamil Nadu. According to a survey by the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Research Centre, nearly 35,000 hectares of agricultural land in the tannery belt had become partially or totally unfit for cultivation. [Paragraph 1] The tanneries used about 170 types of chemicals in the chrome tanning process, including sodium chloride, lime, sodium sulfate, chlorium sulfate, fat liquor, ammonia, and sulfuric acid, along with dyes. [Paragraph 1] These effluents had spoiled the physico-chemical properties of the soil and contaminated groundwater by percolation. [Paragraph 1]
An independent survey conducted by a nongovernmental organization, Peace Members, revealed that out of 467 wells used for drinking and irrigation purposes in 13 villages, 350 wells had been polluted. Women and children had to walk miles to get drinking water. [Paragraph 1]
III. Efforts to Control Pollution
The tanneries and other polluting industries in Tamil Nadu had been persuaded for the last 10 years by the State Government and the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to control the pollution generated by them. They were given the option to either construct common effluent treatment plants (CETPs) for a cluster of industries or set up individual pollution control devices. [Paragraph 2] The Central Government agreed to provide substantial subsidies for the construction of CETPs. [Paragraph 2] However, most tanneries operating in Tamil Nadu had not taken any steps to control the pollution caused by the discharge of effluents. [Paragraph 2]
IV. Supreme Court's Directions
The Supreme Court issued various directions to address the issue of pollution caused by the tanneries and other industries in Tamil Nadu.
Sustainable Development and Polluter Pays Principle
The Court recognized the concept of "Sustainable Development" as a balancing concept between ecology and development, which has been accepted as part of customary international law. [Paragraph 2] The Court held that the "Precautionary Principle" and the "Polluter Pays Principle" are essential features of "Sustainable Development." [Paragraph 2]
The "Precautionary Principle" means:
1. Environmental measures by the State Government and statutory authorities must anticipate, prevent, and attack the causes of environmental degradation. [Paragraph 2]
2. Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. [Paragraph 2]
3. The "onus of proof" is on the actor or the developer/industrialist to show that their action is environmentally benign. [Paragraph 2]
The "Polluter Pays Principle" means that the absolute liability for harm to the environment extends not only to compensating the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the damaged environment. [Paragraph 2] The polluters must compensate the affected persons and pay the cost of reversing the damaged ecology. [Paragraph 3]
Constitution of an Authority
The Court directed the Central Government to constitute an authority under Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, to deal with the situation created by the tanneries and other polluting industries in Tamil Nadu. [Paragraph 4] The authority was to be headed by a retired High Court judge and would have the power to issue directions under Section 5 of the Act and take measures to address the pollution. [Paragraph 4]
The authority was tasked with implementing the "Precautionary Principle" and the "Polluter Pays Principle." It was to assess the loss to the ecology/environment in the affected areas, identify the individuals/families who had suffered due to pollution, and determine the compensation to be paid to them. The authority was also to determine the compensation to be recovered from the polluters as the cost of reversing the damaged environment. [Paragraph 4]
Compensation and Pollution Fine
The authority was directed to compute the compensation under two heads: for reversing the ecology and for payment to individuals. The compensation amount was to be recovered from the polluters by the Collector/District Magistrate as arrears of land revenue. [Paragraph 4]
The Court imposed a pollution fine of Rs. 10,000 on each tannery in the five districts of Tamil Nadu (North Arcot Ambedkar, Erode Periyar, Dindigul Anna, Trichi, and Chengai M.G.R.). The fine was to be deposited in an "Environment Protection Fund" and utilized for compensating the affected persons and restoring the damaged environment. [Paragraph 6]
Closure of Tanneries and Compliance with Pollution Control Measures
The Court suspended the closure orders for all tanneries in the five districts and directed them to set up CETPs or individual pollution control devices by November 30, 1996. The tanneries connected to CETPs were required to install primary devices as well. All tanneries were required to obtain consent from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to operate from December 15, 1996. Tanneries that failed to obtain consent were to be closed immediately. [Paragraph 8]
The Court directed the Superintendent of Police and the Collector/District Magistrate/Deputy Commissioner of the respective districts to close all tanneries that failed to obtain consent from the Board by the specified date. Such tanneries were not to be reopened unless permitted by the authority, which could also direct their permanent closure or relocation. [Paragraph 9]
Enforcement of Government Order and Compliance with Standards
The Court directed the enforcement of the Government Order No. 213 dated March 30, 1989, which prohibited the setting up of highly polluting industries, including tanneries, within one kilometer of water sources. The authority was tasked with reviewing the cases of industries already operating in the prohibited area and could direct their relocation. [Paragraph 10]
The standards stipulated by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board regarding total dissolved solids (TDS), as approved by the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), were to be operative. All tanneries and other industries in Tamil Nadu were required to comply with these standards. [Paragraph 11]
Monitoring by the Madras High Court
The Supreme Court requested the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to constitute a special "Green Bench" to deal with this case and other environmental matters. The Green Bench was given the liberty to pass any appropriate orders while keeping in view the directions issued by the Supreme Court. [Paragraph 12]
V. Conclusion
The Supreme Court's judgment in the Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India case addressed the severe environmental degradation caused by the tanneries and other industries in Tamil Nadu. The Court issued comprehensive directions to control pollution, implement the principles of sustainable development and polluter pays, constitute an authority to assess and recover compensation, enforce compliance with pollution control measures, and monitor the implementation through a dedicated Green Bench in the Madras High Court.
RELATED Blog
0 comments