 Taking a cue from the fundamental duty under Article 51-A(g), many Public Interest

Litigations (PIL) were filed by the Indian citizenry to assert their environmental rights.
 As far as environmental laws are concerned, they can be classified into two categories: laws
dealing with pollution and laws pertaining to the conservation of nature such as forests and
wildlife.
 Emergence of encvironment laws and policies -

 The year 1972 marked a watershed in the environmental conservation movement

in India. On the eve of the United Nations Conference on Human Environment in
1972, popularly called the Stockholm Conference, the Pitamber Committee was
set up to make a report on the state of the environment in India and based on its
recommendations, a National Committee on Environmental Planning and
Coordination (NCEPC) was constituted by the Government of India in the
Department of Science and Technology in order to plan and coordinate
environmental programmes and policies and advice various ministries on
environmental protection. Later, this department was elevated to form an
exclusive Ministry of Environment and Forests in 1985.
 The first ever global effort was made at Stockholm in 1972 to protect the
environment at the international level. On behalf of India, Smt. Indira Gandhi, the
then Prime Minister of India, participated in the Stockholm Conference. She not
only represented India, but all the third world countries. She gave a new
dimension to the problem by saying that it is not only the developmental
activities but poverty, which is the greatest polluter. The Conference proclaimed
that man had the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions
of life, in an environment of a quality that presented a life of dignity and well
being.
 The Stockholm Declaration mandated all the countries to approach environmental
problems with a new vigour by enacting fresh laws and policies in their countries.
This became a starting point for many countries. Those who already had laws and
policies fine-tuned their instruments to meet new demands.
 India responded to the problem to a great extent and many new special
legislations have been enacted besides upgrading the existing ones. The
Constitution of India was amended in 1976 (42nd amendment) to incorporate two
important provisions on environment in the Constitution. Article 48-A was
inserted into the Part IV of the Constitution making environmental protection a
part of Directive Principles of State Policy. Article 48-A states that the State shall
“strive to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard forests and
wildlife”. Article 51-A(g) declared that it shall be the fundamental duty of every
citizen of India “to protect and improve the natural environment including forests,
lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures”. This is a
significant leap forward in the environmental management in India. Article 48-A
mandated the State to make new laws and policies for the protection of
environment.

Initially, environmental protection was seen by many developing nations,6

including India, 7 as a goal conflicting with developmental priorities.

Some nations even regarded the industrialized nations'

recommendations that developing countries adopt environmental policies

as a ploy to divert them from achieving their own economic development.8

The late Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi expressed this attitude

in 1972 at the United Nations Conference on the Human

Environment, 9 when she asked: "How can we speak to those who live in

villages and in slums about keeping the oceans, rivers and the air clean

when their own lives are contaminated at the source?"

Emergence of PIL: judicial innovation

The emergence of the PIL as an innovative instrument of judicial interpretation and
intervention in the 1980s led to increasing involvement of the judiciary in addressing
environmental concerns in the backdrop of the failure of state enforcement agencies to
adequately address problems of environmental pollution.
A creative interpretation of the Constitution to expand the scope of the fundamental right to
life under Article 21 had a considerable impact on environmental jurisprudence in India In
the Dehradun quarrying case, the Supreme Court expanded the scope of right to life under
Article 21 to include right to a clean environment with minimum disturbance of ecological
balance.
However, even in the early phase of the application of Public Interest Litigation, the Court
had to negotiate with complex political questions that are inextricably linked to
environmental concerns. In M C Mehta v Union of India the Supreme Court appointed expert
committees to recommend adequate safety measures for the functioning of the Shriram
chlorine plant from which harmful oleum gas had leaked affecting a large number of people.
As the Court laid down the conditions for the operation and reopening of the plant, it noted
that a “permanent closure of the plant” would have led to a loss of around 4000 jobs. The
Court is therefore negotiating with the larger question of livelihood concerns inextricably
linked to environmental problems in the present case. The appointment of a committee to
monitor the operation and maintenance of the plant is an attempt to implement the
recommendations of the Court. While this can be seen as a suitable mechanism of grievance
redressal, it cannot be a long term method for the successful implementation of a coherent
environmental policy.