MC Mehta v union of India Ganga pollutants case explain facts Arguments judgments and articles of constitution of India
MC Mehta v Union of India, commonly known as the Ganga pollutants case, is a landmark environmental case in India. It was filed by MC Mehta, an environmental lawyer, in 1985 to address the pollution of the Ganges (Ganga) River caused by industrial and sewage discharge.
Facts:
The case was primarily concerned with the pollution of the Ganges River due to the release of untreated sewage and industrial effluents. The pollution was causing significant harm to the environment, public health, and the religious significance of the river, which is considered sacred in Hinduism.
Arguments:
The petitioner, MC Mehta, argued that the pollution of the Ganges River violated the citizens' right to a clean and healthy environment, as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Mehta also highlighted the failure of the government and various pollution control boards in implementing effective measures to prevent and control pollution.
The arguments put forth by Mehta included the need for stringent regulations, strict enforcement, and the establishment of sewage treatment plants and effluent treatment plants to address the pollution issue. Mehta also sought the closure of industries operating without proper pollution control measures.
Judgments:
The case had several stages and resulted in multiple judgments over the years. Some key judgments and outcomes include:
MC Mehta I (1988): The Supreme Court directed the closure of polluting industries along the Ganges River and ordered the establishment of sewage treatment plants (STPs) and common effluent treatment plants (CETPs) to control pollution.
MC Mehta II (1996): The court emphasized the importance of preventing pollution at its source and ordered the closure of industries that failed to comply with pollution control measures. It also appointed the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) to monitor compliance.
MC Mehta III (2004): The court directed the formulation of the Ganga Action Plan Phase II, which aimed to address the remaining pollution sources and improve water quality.
MC Mehta IV (2017): The court expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of progress in cleaning the Ganges River and established the National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA) to oversee the rejuvenation of the river.
Articles of the Constitution of India:
The case primarily relied on Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the fundamental right to life and personal liberty. The court interpreted this right to include the right to a clean environment, recognizing that environmental protection is essential for the well-being and health of the citizens.
Other relevant provisions that were considered in the case include Article 48A, which directs the state to protect and improve the environment, and Article 51A(g), which imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment.
It's important to note that the case spanned several decades and had various subsequent orders and judgments. Therefore, this overview provides a general understanding of the case, but it may not cover all the intricate details or recent developments.