Dpsp and Environmental Protection

DPSP AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

“

”

In India, the concern for environmental protection has not only been raised to the status of fundamental law of the land, but it is also wedded with human rights approach and it is now well established that, it is the basic human right of every individual to live in pollution free environment with full human dignity. The then Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi, in the first International Conference on Human Environment at Stockholm in 1972, voiced deep concern about the degradation of the environment and eco-imbalances. She also emphasized that  pollution, population and poverty are inter-related problems and there must be an integrated approach to deal with them. India was also one of the signatories of the Stockholm Declaration which is known as Magna Carta on human environment. Based upon the Stockholm conference, the Indian parliament passed the forty second amendment to the constitution in the year 19765 and incorporated specially two Articles relating to protection and improvement of environment where in the Constitution of India obligates the “State” as well as “Citizens” to “Protect and Improve” the environment1. DPSP is scattered Hytho the Articles 36-51 in the part 10th of constitution. DPSP widely informed about the protection of women class, weaker section, buys, environment. The concept of Directive Principles of State Policy was borrowed from the Irish Constitution. Article 47 of the Constitution which reads: “The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medical purposes of intoxicating drinks and drugs which are injurious to health”. The basic  principle embodied in the Article very clearly denies the statement to some of the learned authors that initially our Constitution was environmentally blind38 and environment as a subject has  been left out of the Constitution. Article 47 calls upon the State to perform the basic duty to look after the health of the citizen and also take necessary and effective steps to improve their standard of living and also raise the level of nutrition. Improvement of public health forms the 1

 Article 48-A 48- A “Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life: The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country ”. Article 51A(g) It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures;

1

core of environment because due to various environmental hazards it is the health of the general  people which comes under severe threat. In order to protect the health the framers of the Constitution gave emphasis on the improvement of public health which is more vital for the existence of the mankind. In the present times several factors account for the pollution hazards which is going beyond control. The pollution of water and air spoils the nature very well and affect our health. Therefore, taking into consideration, the Constitution very aptly recognized the right to health and casts a responsibility upon the State making it obligatory to work for improving the health of the citizens. In Talcher Swasthya Surakshya Parishad v. Chairman-Cum-MD Mohanadi Coal F ields Ltd 2., and Others39 it was alleged that due to the operation of the collieries in the Talcher area, the  people of Talcher town and nearby areas have been affected as there is no pure air to breathe and  pure water to drink. They are forced to inhale such air being exposed to dust and effluent material and also are forced to take contaminated water which has become unsuitable for drinking purposes due to such dust and effluent articles. It was also alleged that due to extraction done from underneath the ground surface, land is  becoming loose and there have been several instances of seepage of water and subsidence of earth, thereby endangering human life and property. In this case the High Court observed that: “It is needless to say that all concerned, i.e., the governments, the government agency like the Pollution Control Board, the coal-mines owners operating in the area have to ensure that at the altar of industrial development, environment and consequentially health of the people do not get sacrificed. It is the function of the Pollution Control Board to ensure that the rigid guidelines required to be followed in the matter of air and water pollution. Statistics may not always reflect the correct state of affairs. In the maze of figures, let welfare of people is not lost”. The Pollution Control Board was directed to take strict steps after determining consequences of such pollution and see that there is no reoccurrence. It was further directed by the Court that, “for industrial development, the people should not become ill on account of collapse of buildings, surface erosion and water pollution3 . In H amid Khan v. State of M adhyapradesh4it was held that there was a gross negligence on the part of the state government in not taking proper measure before 2

 AIR 1996 Ori 195.  Dr.Sukanta K.Nanda, Environmental Law, 75 (Central Law Publication: Allahabad, 1st Edn., 2007). 4  AIR 1997 MP 191. 3

2

supplying drinking water from hand-pumps which has resulted in colossal damage to the people, the Court held that the State was responsible and has failed to discharge its primary responsibility. With the objective of affording better protection to the environment, the Constitution was amended in the year 1976 and a new Article 48-A was inserted into the Constitution which reads: “The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wild life of the country”. This Article used the word ‘Environment’ in a wider sense which affects all the living being and influences the conditions of their lives. Water and air are among such important factors which mould the life of the citizens. Billions of years have passed and the society is still dependant on water and also will continue to do so, thus proving the necessity and vitality of water for the existence of the mankind. Hence, it becomes the pious duty and responsibility of the State to protect the water and water resources as well as whole environment from all activities. So if we construe the Article, this necessarily requires the State not only to adopt the protectionist policy but also to provide for the improvement of the environment. Article 48-A further provides “to safeguard the forests and wild life”. This is an important  provision as the environment is greatly influenced by forests and wild life. The forests in  particular has a direct relation with water pollution as the forest is responsible for natural rain which protects against pollution to a great extent and again by maintaining a balance, it constitutes an important safeguard against atmosphere pollution. In this way the forests contribute a lot in protecting the pollution of water 5. In India, the judicial attitude in protecting and improving the environment provides a testimony of the fact that, directive principles are not mere “guiding principles” of policy but they have to  be given effect to. In Shri. Sachidanand Pandey v. State of West Bengal 6the Supreme Court  pointed out that whenever a problem of ecology is brought before the court, the court is bound to  bear in mind Articles 48-A and 51-A (g) of the Constitution, the Court further observed: “When the Court is called upon to give effect to the directive principles and the fundamental duty, the court is not to shrug its shoulders and say that priorities are a matter of policy. The least the Court may do is to examine whether appropriate consideration are borne in mind and

5

 Dr. Sukanta K. Nanda, Environmental Law, 76 (Central Law Publication: Allahabad, 1st Edn., 2007).  AIR 1987 SC 1109.

6

3

irrelevancies excluded. In appropriate cases, the Court may go further, but how much further must depend on the circumstances of the case. The Court may always give necessary directions. However, the Court will not attempt to nicely balance relevant considerations. When the question involves nice balancing of relevant considerations, the court may feel justified in resigning itself to acceptance of the decision of the concerned authority”. In T. D amodhar R ao. v. S. O M unicipal Corporation, H yderabad 7 the court pointed out that in view of Articles 48-A and 51-A(g), it is clear that protection of environment is not only the duty of every citizen but it is also the “obligation” of the State and all other State organs including courts. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of I ndia45 8the court observed that Articles-39(e), 47 and 48-A  by themselves and collectively casts a duty on the State to secure the health of the people, improve public health and protect and improve environment. The cumulative effect of Articles 48-A and 51-A(g) appears to be that the ‘State’ as much as the ‘Citizens’ both are now under a constitutional obligation to conserve, preserve, protect and improve the environment. CONCLUSION

Environmental pollution which has emerged as one of the biggest social problems is being regarded as a real problem affecting the society at large and thus state is under an obligation to fulfill the basic aim of socialism, that is, to provide decent standard of living to all which can be  possible from a pollution free environment. The environmental issues are complex and need to dwell on points of scientific and technical relevance. The Courts in such situations find it difficult to form its own independent opinion and take recourse to the help of expert committees which is a long and time consuming exercise. The powers vested to the Pollution Control Boards are not enough to prevent pollution. The Boards do not have power to punish the violators but can launch prosecution against them in the Courts which ultimately defeat the purpose and object of the Environmental Laws due to long delays in deciding the cases. Environmental protection is an integral part of the development  process and cannot be considered in isolation from it. This involves a holistic approach and understanding of issues which are best handled with the participation of all concerned.

7

 AIR 1987 AP 171  5 (2002) 4 SCC 356. (popularly known as CNG case).

8

4

5