Environmental law in India has evolved in response to pressing ecological crises and the recognition that a healthy environment is integral to the right to life. Industrial growth, urbanization, and reckless exploitation of resources have led to pollution, deforestation, and ecological imbalance. Courts, civil society, and the legislature have together shaped a distinctive framework of environmental jurisprudence. Two aspects stand out in this journey: the role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court and High Courts, and the establishment of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) as a specialized forum for environmental disputes. Together, they represent India’s attempt to balance development with sustainability.
The Rise of Environmental PILs
In the late 1970s and 1980s, India witnessed the birth of Public Interest Litigation, a tool that allowed citizens, NGOs, and even journalists to approach courts on behalf of communities. Environmental issues soon became a fertile ground for PILs, as ecological degradation often harmed the poor and voiceless.
One of the earliest cases was Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1985), where the Supreme Court ordered closure of limestone quarries in Mussoorie to protect fragile ecology. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987), the Court addressed the leakage of oleum gas in Delhi, evolving the principle of absolute liability for hazardous industries. Over the next decades, M.C. Mehta himself filed a series of PILs that led to landmark interventions like cleaning of the Ganga, relocation of hazardous industries from Delhi, introduction of CNG vehicles, and strengthening of pollution control norms.
These PILs reflected judicial creativity in interpreting Article 21. The Court repeatedly held that the right to life includes the right to a healthy environment. In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991), it declared that the right to clean water and air is fundamental. Thus, environmental protection became a constitutional imperative, not just a policy goal.
Principles of Environmental Jurisprudence
Indian courts, through PILs, articulated several guiding principles:
- Polluter Pays Principle: Those who pollute must compensate for damage, recognized in Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996).
- Precautionary Principle: Lack of scientific certainty is no excuse to delay preventive measures, emphasized in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996).
- Sustainable Development: Economic growth must be balanced with environmental protection, as reiterated in Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (2000).
These principles, though judicially evolved, have been incorporated into policies and statutes, making them cornerstones of Indian environmental law.
Establishment of the National Green Tribunal
Recognizing the need for specialized expertise, Parliament enacted the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The NGT was created as a dedicated body to handle environmental cases swiftly and effectively. With benches in Delhi, Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata, and Chennai, it has jurisdiction over civil cases arising under key environmental statutes, including the Environment Protection Act, Water Act, Air Act, and Forest Conservation Act.
The Tribunal is known for its strict timelines as cases must be decided within six months and for its multidisciplinary composition, including judges and technical experts. This ensures that complex scientific and ecological issues receive informed adjudication.
Role and Impact of the NGT
Since its inception, the NGT has delivered several impactful judgments. It has imposed fines on industries polluting rivers, banned older diesel vehicles in Delhi to reduce air pollution, and ordered compensation for victims of industrial accidents. In Almitra Patel v. Union of India, the Tribunal issued directions on solid waste management, pushing municipalities to modernize waste disposal systems.
The NGT has also become a forum for community grievances. Villagers affected by mining, residents suffering from noise pollution, and NGOs fighting deforestation have all found a platform in the Tribunal. Its orders are binding and appealable only to the Supreme Court, giving it strong authority.
Challenges and Criticisms
Despite successes, the NGT faces challenges. Limited benches and heavy caseloads strain its capacity. Critics argue that it sometimes exceeds jurisdiction or issues sweeping bans without adequate consultation, leading to friction with governments. Questions have also been raised about enforcement of its orders, as pollution control boards often lack resources to implement directions.
Moreover, the NGT Act restricts its jurisdiction mainly to civil cases, leaving criminal prosecution of polluters outside its scope. Some activists fear this creates gaps in accountability. Nonetheless, the Tribunal remains a vital forum, often more accessible and responsive than traditional courts.
The Future of Environmental Litigation
Environmental litigation in India continues to expand, addressing issues from climate change to groundwater depletion. Courts are increasingly asked to balance infrastructure projects with ecological concerns. The Supreme Court in Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India (2019) reminded governments that environmental clearances cannot be treated as mere formalities.
The rise of youth movements, climate activism, and global commitments under the Paris Agreement are likely to intensify environmental litigation in coming years. Digital tools and scientific data are also strengthening the evidence base for such cases.
Conclusion
The story of environmental litigation in India is a story of judicial innovation and institutional response. PILs opened the doors of constitutional courts to communities suffering from ecological harm. The NGT added technical expertise and speed to environmental adjudication. Together, they have transformed the landscape of environmental governance.