NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY

BHOPAL

NATURAL RESOURCES LAW

INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY

X SEMESTER

SESSION 2020-21

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED

BY:
PROF. RAJIV KHARE VIPUL
DOHLE
2016BALLB110
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The present project on the “Intergenerational Equity” has been able to get its final shape
with the support and help of people from various quarters. My sincere thanks go to all
the members without whom the study could not have come to its present state. I am
proud to acknowledge gratitude to the individuals during my study and without whom
the study may not be completed. I have taken this opportunity to thank those who
genuinely helped me. With immense. pleasure, I express my deepest sense of gratitude
to Prof. Rajiv Khare, and National Law Institute University for helping me in my
project. Not to forget thanking to my parents without the co-operation of which
completion of this project would not had been possible. II have made every effort to
acknowledge credits, but I apologies in advance for any omission that may have
inadvertently taken place. Last but not least I would like to thank Almighty whose
blessing helped me to complete the project.

- Vipul
Dohle
TITLE OF THE PROJECT:
Constitutional validity of Intergenerational Equity

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM:
The concept of intergenerational equity distributes well-being through time, ensuring the well-being
of present and future generations of a population or nation, promoting temporal sustainability of a
well-being decision. 

OBJECTIVE OF STUDY:
To understand the concept of Intergenerational equity and also to evaluate its presence and essence
in international as well as national law.

HYPOTHESIS:
The trustees of endowed institutions are the guardians of the future against the claims of the present.
Their task in managing the endowment is to preserve equity among generations
.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
1) What is Intergenerational Equity?
2) How intergenerational equity helps in conservation?
3) What are the different approaches to intergenerational equity?
4) Whether this concept has been recognized in India?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
No stone has been left unturned to make this project a worthy task. To let it not go a futile exercise
every possible step has been taken. It is being believed by the researcher that it will open a door of
success in making many such academic researches and even better than it, when needed. It would
quench the thirst for academic excellence and dealing with such wrong in real life, if continued.
Besides this it will also fulfil the desire of the researcher to contribute services to the society. The
method adopted in making this project is the Doctrinal Method of research. The method of writing
followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical. The researcher has followed a
uniform mode of citation throughout the course of this research paper.
 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

I. STATUTES
 CONSTITUTION of India

II. CASES
 Minors Oposa v. Secretary
 Gabèikovo- Nagymaros Project
 State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products
 Kinkri Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh
 K. Guruprasad Rao v. State of Karnataka
 A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Naydu and Ors
 Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India (The CRZ Notification Case
 Glanrock Estate v. State of Tamil Nadu

III. ARTICLES
 Intergenerational equity: a legal framework for global environmental change
By Edith Brown Wiess
 The Role of the Judiciary in Promoting Sustainable Development: The Experience of
Asia and the Pacific
By J. Brian

 Intergenerational Equity and Sustainable Investing

By George Suttles
 Will India be First?
By Rahul Basu

IV. MISCELLANEOUS
 1972 UN Stockholm Conference
 1987 Brutland Report
 INTRODUCTION
The environment is something we are very familiar with. It's everything that makes up our
surroundings and affects our ability to live on the earth—the air we breathe, the water that covers
most of the earth's surface, the plants and animals around us, and much more. The word Environment
is derived from the French word “Environ” which means “surrounding”. Our surrounding includes
biotic factors like human beings, Plants, animals, microbes, etc and abiotic factors such as light, air,
water, soil, etc.
Environment is a complex of many variables, which surrounds man as well as the living organisms.
Environment includes water, air and land and the interrelation ships which exist among and between
water, air and land and human beings and other living creatures such as plants, animals and
microorganisms. As we all know that environment consists of an inseparable whole system
constituted by physical, chemical, biological, social and cultural elements, which are interlinked
individually and collectively in myriad ways. It is therefore, very important to understand and
appreciate the importance of ‘environment’ in our daily life. It is the environment which regulate the
entire life of human being. The environmental factors are in our all around, the society in which we
live. So, it is important for us to protect these things as entire life on earth depends on it. If we go in
details then we find that, in recent years, scientists have been carefully examining the various ways
by which people affect the
‘Environment’. They have found that we are causing air pollution, deforestation, acid rain, and other
problems that are dangerous both to the earth and to ourselves. We may have heard of laws, rules and
regulations to deal with the above-mentioned situations. Yes, it is, but it is the duty of the
Government to show keen interest in protecting and promoting the environment and consequently
enacted various Environmental Laws and all these things have great influence from our law of Land
(Constitution). Environmental protection is a practice of protecting the natural environment at
individual, organizational or governmental levels, for the benefit of the natural environment and
humans. Due to the pressures of population and technology, the biophysical environment is being
degraded, either partially or permanently. This has been recognized, and governments have begun
placing restraints on activities that cause environmental degradation. Since the 1960’s, movements
for the protection of environment have created awareness about the various environmental issues1.

1
https://www.nios.ac.in/media/documents/SrSec338new/338_Book2
 Definition and Concept of Intergeneration Equity
Equity, as we all know, refers to fairness or similarity. In industry, the term "equity" refers to assets
or capital. The term 'Equity' in 'Intergenerational equity,' in my opinion, borrows all senses of the
word. Equity refers to the provision of resources to all generations, as well as the treatment of natural
resources as funds for future growth. Intergenerational justice is a key theme of sustainability that is
often articulated as a concern for future generations.

The most widely accepted definition of ‘intergenerational equity’ is the one espoused by the World
Commission on Environmental and Development 2, which held that “policy makers should seek to
meet their own needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs”.
The concept of intergenerational equity has the following three aspects, as enumerated by Professor
Edith Brown Weiss in her seminal paper ‘Intergenerational equity: a legal framework for global
environmental change’3 published in 1992 and reinforced by Justice Brian J. Preston in his paper

2
Brutland Report, 1987
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf
3
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2734420
‘The Role of the Judiciary in Promoting Sustainable Development: The Experience of Asia and the
Pacific’4:
“Each generation should be required to conserve the diversity of the natural and cultural resource
base, so that it does not unduly restrict the options available to future generations in solving their
problems and satisfying their own values, and should also be entitled to diversity comparable to that
enjoyed by previous generations. This principle is called conservation of options.
1. Each generation should be required to maintain the quality of the planet so that it is passed
on in no worse condition than that in which it was received, and should also be entitled to planetary
quality comparable to that enjoyed by previous generations. This is the principle of conservation of
quality.
2. Each generation should provide its members with equitable rights of access to the legacy of
past generations and should conserve this access for future generations. This is the principle of
conservation of accesses.”
Sustainable development is based on a dedication to the generations' equity. The United Nations
Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972 acknowledged that we have a duty to
"protect and improve" the environment for current and future generations. Concerns on
environmental justice for future generations first surfaced during the preparatory meetings for the
Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972. In 1992, we were faced with the task of
identifying and putting into practise this pledge to future generations in the form of environmentally
sustainable growth.
Three treaties signed more or less concurrently with the Stockholm Declaration expressly included
the principle of protecting the natural world for future generations. “The natural resources are
permanent assets of mankind and are not intended to be exhausted in one generation ”5. The theory of
intergenerational equity emphasises each human generation's right to benefit from the cultural and
natural heritage of previous generations. Future generations would have the same access to natural
capital as current generations, according to the concept of intergenerational equity. Since the current
generation inherited the world from their forefathers, they owe it to the next generation to carry it on
under the same condition.6 It is clear that creation is impossible without the use of natural resources.
The concept of intergenerational equality encourages the most efficient utilisation of capital. It
prevents the current generation from exploiting land to the point of exhaustion, allowing future
generations to benefit from those natural resources as well. Natural resources are not possessed by
any human being or age, and they cannot be recreated by humans; they must be shared equally
4
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1124804
5
Kinkri Devi v. State, A.I.R. 1988 H.P. 4
6
Principle 8 of Rio declaration
among all generations. The need for Intergenerational equity arose because of following three main
reasons:
1. Pollution disturbing Ecological Balance: Ecological balance is required for the natural
resource recreation process to run smoothly. However, disrupted ecological equilibrium is primarily
caused by stepping stones toward growth. Environmental conservation was seen as a roadblock in
the way of industrialization, and no steps were taken to reduce emissions generated by expanding
factories. Human activities, in addition to industrial activities, contribute to different forms of
pollution, such as air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, land pollution, and so on. Human
activities are polluting natural resources in every manner possible.
2. Loss of Biodiversity: Biodiversity refers to the variety of life types that exist as a result of
genetic combinations, species, and ecosystems. Biodiversity aids in water quality conservation,
nutrient recycling and cycling, climate stability, and habitat maintenance. However, these advantages
are not well recognised, and no particular attempt was made to discourage bio diversity. This
culminated in the extinction of many bird and animal species, as well as the disruption of the
ecological environment.
3. Excessive and Reckless Use of Natural Resources: We all know that natural resources are
limited, and that they can only be replenished by nature, which can take hundreds of years. The
current generation makes use of any available modern device to make their lives easier. These
devices run on energy derived directly or indirectly from natural resources. The current generation is
overusing natural resources to the point of exhaustion. This sent troubling signals around the globe,
prompting the creation of a philosophy that emphasises the conservation of natural resources for
future generations, who have equitable access to the world's natural resources.
In the area of the environment, intergenerational equity was addressed by incorporating the idea of
conserving land for future generations, which paved the way for Sustainable Development.
Sustainable development is described as development that meets current needs without jeopardising
future generations' capacity to fulfil their own needs. It is a trend of growth in which resource usage
seeks to meet human needs while protecting the environment so that these needs can be met not only
now, but also in the future. In today's world, it's a buzzword. Both countries have made the term
"sustainable" a part of their growth goals. The Brundtland Commission defines sustainable
development as development that addresses current needs without jeopardising future generations'
capacity to fulfil their own.
 APPROACHES TO INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY
In the form of the relationship between generations and the planet Earth, there are many ways to
identifying intergenerational equity.
The first is the preservationist model, in which the current generation does not kill or deplete land,
nor does it drastically change anything; instead, it conserves resources for future generations while
maintaining the same degree of efficiency in all facets of the ecosystem. This preservationist model
has deep roots in English water law's initial natural-flow principle, which stated that riparians could
use stream water as long as it did not affect the quantity or consistency of water for those
downstream. Since there is no one to whom they owe a responsibility, this ultimately supports the
last riparian before the current joins the ocean or dies.
If the preservationist paradigm is used to save unspoiled habitats to the logical conclusion, the status
quo will be maintained. It only makes sense in a subsistence economy, not in a developed world. In a
more compact way, the model supports Stalin's socialist economic growth model, in which people
were encouraged to make today's sacrifices in exchange for a better future. This stance was also
shared by Calvinists. Future generations prosper at the detriment of previous generations in all cases.
The opulence paradigm is the opposite extreme, in which the current generation buys all it needs
now and produces as much wealth as it can, either because future generations are unknown or
because optimising consumption today is the only way to increase wealth for future generations. This
paradigm ignores the potential for long-term environmental destruction, such as permanent depletion
of species diversity and natural resources like soils and fish, as well as expensive environmental
pollution, such as insufficiently regulated radioactive or toxic wastes, rendering areas unsafe for
habitation and usage. In addition, according to this model, the current generation could cause
irreversible changes in the global climate system, affecting the habitability of certain parts of the
globe.
Even if we thought we were the last generation of humans to exist on the planet, it is unclear if we
will have the ability to desecrate or kill it, because the human race is, in the end, only a small part of
a much greater ecological environment that we can use for our own gain but must still move on to
future generations.
The technology model is a variation of the opulence(luxurious) model, in which we don't have to
worry about the climate for future generations because technological advances would enable us to
implement infinite resource substitution. While technology will certainly allow us to create certain
replacements for some resources and to utilise them more effectively, it is far from certain that it will
be sufficient or that it will render the planet's robustness obsolete.
Finally, there's the environmental economics paradigm, which claims that if we properly pay for
natural resources, we'll be able to meet our responsibilities to future generations. If we apply "green"
economics, the economic methods we have built today - environmental externalities and discounting
- are adequate.
The Proposed theory of Intergenerational Equity
The proposed theory of intergenerational harmony asserts that we, the human race, share our planet's
natural environment with all members of our species, including past, present, and future generations.
We are guardians of the Earth and future generations as part of the first generation. Around the same
time, we are the ones who have been granted the right to use and profit from it.
Any theory of intergenerational justice in the context of our natural world must take into account two
relationships: our contribution to other generations of our own species and our relationship to the
natural system of which we are a part. The human race is inextricably linked to the rest of the natural
world; we both affect and are affected by what happens in the setting. The only humans on the planet
are us. In the nature of our natural world, every philosophy of intergenerational justice must consider
two relationships: our contribution to other generations of our own species and our connection to the
natural environment of which we are a member. The human race is inextricably related to the rest of
nature; we both influence and are influenced by what occurs in the environment. As the most sentient
of living creatures, we have a special responsibility to care for the world. The bond that occurs
between human generations is the second fundamental relationship. Both generations, past and
future, are inextricably linked when it comes to using the earth's mutual patrimony. Both parents,
according to the philosophy of intergenerational equity, deserve a fair chance.
This assumption is supported by international law. "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and
equitable and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom,
peace, and unity in the world..." begins the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
the connection to all members of the human family has a social dimension, binding all generations
together. International law underpins this assumption. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
begins, “whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members
of the human family is the foundation of freedom, peace, and unity in the world... “ 7; the relationship
to all members of the human family has a reciprocal dimension, binding all generations together.
Partnership between generations is the corollary to equality. It is appropriate to view the human
community as a partnership among all generations. In describing a state as a partnership, Edmund
Burke observed that “as the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, it

7
UDHR
becomes a partnership not only between those who are living but between those who are living,
those who are dead, and those who are to be born.” 8 In relation to the natural environment of which
it is a member, the object of human society must be to understand and secure the health and well-
being of each generation. This necessitates preserving the planet's resilience, including the life-
support mechanisms, ecosystem cycles, and environmental conditions needed for a stable and decent
human climate.9
No generation knows when it will be the living generation, how many members it will have, or even
how many generations there will be of the end in this relationship. If we consider the viewpoint of a
generation that is put somewhere in the timeline but does not know when it will be, such a generation
will want to inherit the Earth in at least as decent of a state as any previous generation and to have
access to it as previous generations did.
This means that each generation must leave the world in better shape than it found it, and have equal
access to its wealth and benefits. Each generation is thus both a trustee and a beneficiary of the earth,
with responsibilities to care for it and rights to use it.
If one generation struggles to preserve the earth at the same degree of quality as previous
generations, future generations are obligated to restore the destruction, even if it is expensive. They
should, however, spread the costs over many generations using revenue bonds and other financial
instruments, ensuring that the gains and costs of remediation are shared equally. While the
generation that causes environmental conditions to deteriorate gains at the cost of immediate future
generations, future generations farther down the line are safeguarded. Furthermore, the generation
that caused the damage could have left a sufficiently higher degree of resources for immediate
subsequent generations to successfully handle the decline.
While it can seem that achieving intergenerational equity is incompatible with achieving
intragenerational equity, the two can and must coexist. Members of the current generation have an
intergenerational right to use and profit from the planet's wealth, which stems from the inherent
dignity that all generations share in their use of the natural environment.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY

Three principles underpin intergenerational wealth. First, each generation should be encouraged to
preserve the diversity of the natural and cultural resource base, so that future generations' chances to
8
Edmund Burke, Irish Journal
9
H. Barnett and C. Morse, Scarcity and Growth (Johns Hopkins, 1963).
solve problems and realise their own values are not unduly restricted, and they should be entitled to
the same diversity that previous generations enjoyed. The “conservation of choice” principle is what
it's called. Second, each generation should be required to maintain the earth's dignity so that it is not
passed down in a worse condition than when it was acquired, and each generation should be entitled
to planetary standard comparable to previous generations. This is explained by the “conservation of
choice” theory. Third, each generation should be held accountable for maintaining the earth's dignity
such that it is passed on in the same state as it was obtained, and each generation should be entitled
to the same planetary norm as previous generations.
The proposed principles affirm each generation's right to use the Earth's resources for its own gain,
but they limit the current generation's activities in doing so. They do not decide how each generation
can handle its capital under these constraints. They don't need the current generation to forecast the
interests of future generations, which would be difficult, if not impossible, to do. Rather, they strive
to provide future generations with a relatively stable and scalable natural resource base that they can
use to meet their own beliefs and desires.
Although the theory of diversity can be understood to include the idea of consistency, the two
concepts are separate and complementary. Consider a common law trust that has interests in two
separate energy companies and a computer company as its corpus. The value of the trust corpus
drops if the trustee invests the shares in other energy and computer companies that turn out to be less
profitable, but the securities' diversification does not change. In contrast, if the trustee consolidates
all of the investments into a single oil company, the value of the stocks will stay the same while the
asset variety is severely diminished. While our planet's environmental sustainability is declining, this
does not imply that its resource base is becoming less rich.
Similarly, one generation could be able to preserve the quality of air and water while losing the
resource base's equilibrium, as shown by a substantial loss of genetic diversity. Without a question,
the two ideas are linked and mutually beneficial. Since there are many alternatives, it is easier to
maintain quality, and extreme water poisoning will lead to fish extinction. When maintaining
continuity is needed, it is preferable to save alternatives. Both ideals are necessary for future
generations to live in a stable society, and they must be upheld. When maintaining continuity is
needed, it is preferable to save alternatives. Both principles are necessary for future generations to
live in a stable society, and they must be implemented simultaneously.
 INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY:
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Intergenerational equity and economic growth started out as an environmental philosophy. It has now
evolved into a legal dispute over whether the present generation has a legal duty to protect the needs
of future generations by resource production that is sustainable.10
The theory of intergenerational equity has its roots in international law. The Preamble to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights begins by recognising the basic and unalienable rights of all
members of the human family as the foundation for global freedom, liberty, and peace. Weiss
interprets the reference to all members as referring to both present and future generations. This
concept is backed up by domestic law.
The Supreme Court of the Philippines held in Minors Oposa v. Secretary11 of the Department of
Environment and NaturalResources8 that the present generation has standing to represent future
generations, since each generation has a responsibility to future generations to preserve nature’s
rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced and healthy natural ecology 12. The idea of
sustainable growth has taken hold in the development of mankind's intragenerational and
intergenerational security since the Declaration of Human Rights. These ideas arose largely from the
application of soft legislation, and were first expressed in Principle 2 of the Stockholm Declaration
on the Human Environment (Stockholm Declaration), which outlines elements of intragenerational
equity. “The protection and improvement of the human environment is a major issue affecting the
well-being of peoples and economic development throughout the world.” 13 The Stockholm
Declaration's Principles 9, 10 and 11 express the idea of sustainable development, emphasising the
importance of environmental conservation and economic development as mutually reinforcing
priorities. Principle 11 of the Stockholm Declaration says, “All states' environmental policies shall
encourage rather than obstruct the present or potential development of developing countries, as well
as the attainment of higher living standards for all.” 14 The concepts of intergenerational equity and
intragenerational equity, as well as their growth through sustainable development, were reaffirmed in
Principle 3 of the Rio Declaration on the Climate and Development (Rio Declaration): “The right to
development must be met in order to equitably address the developmental and environmental needs
of present and future generations.”15 The Rio Declaration's accompanying Agenda 21 action plan for
10
An Approach to Global Environmental Responsibility: Our Responsibility to Future Generations.’ (1990) 84 American
Journal of International Law, 207, 208 8 (1994) 33 ILM.
11
ibid
12
Alexandre Kiss and Dinah Shelton, Guide to International Environmental Law (2007)
13
ibid
14
Stockholm Declaration
15
Rio Declaration
sustainable development laid out the blueprint for achieving Intergenerational and Intragenerational
Equity through sustainable development. Both Declarations, however, are international law rules
(also known as "soft law") that have no binding effect on States. Similarly, Agenda 21 is a plan for
action, rather than a binding document enforceable in international law. the question remains
whether these principles have developed into Customary International Law, or whether they are still
soft law and aspirational. These values are not toothless in terms of intergenerational justice due to
their soft law status, since they are capable of translating into Customary International Law. The
question is whether state protocol and opinio juris have adopted these principles into Customary
International Law.
According to Phillipe Sands, an eminent author on international environmental law, the principle of
“sustainable production” has joined the corpus of International Customary Law. Some authors see
the incorporation of the idea of sustainable growth into a number of Treaties as proof of the
transformation of a legal theory into the binding position of Customary International Law.
In the ICJ decision of The Case Concerning the Gabèikovo- Nagymaros Project16, the court
determined that the concepts of Intergenerational Equity and sustainable development were integral
in the development of the waterway in question. It was noted that new norms and principles have
been established as a result of new science discoveries and an increasing knowledge of the dangers to
mankind's present and future of pursuing such interventions with nature at an unconsidered and
unabated level. The need to balance economic growth with environmental conservation is
appropriately reflected in the idea of sustainable development. Sands notes that by invoking the
concept of sustainable development in this judgment, the ICJ indicates its acceptance of these
principles as part of international law. The evolution of Intergenerational Equity and sustainable
development as Customary International Law has been further demonstrated by ICJ Vice-President
Weeramantry in the Case Concerning the Gabèikovo Nagymaros Project. Weeramantry proclaimed
that sustainable development was much more than a concept. Rather, in Customary International
Law, it was a modern practise or convention. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) cited the
concept of economic development and intergenerational equity once more in the case of Pulp Mills
on the Uruguay River (Argentina v Uruguay). The International Court of Justice expressly
considered the parties' obligation to adhere to the optimal and fair use of the Uruguay River, in line
with the principle of free and balanced use, to ensure that all citizens have access to the river, in this
decision.

16
 CONSTITUTIONALITY OF INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY
In terms of biological diversity, India is one of the world's richest countries. It accounts for almost
8% of the total number of organisms on the planet. (Around 1.6 million people.) Around 15,000
flowering plant species are endemic to India, out of an estimated 47,000 plant species. India has a
rich flora and fauna heritage, and it is the state's responsibility to harness certain resources for the
benefit of the people while still conserving them for future use. The Judicial Organ of our country
recognizes the significance of it and works to protect it by providing guidelines to the states through
the Constitution.
The Supreme Court of India has stepped in to play an activist role, seeing the grave danger faced by
environmentally damaging practises. As a result of this advocacy, many environmental protections
have been added to the list of Fundamental Rights. Under Article 21 of the Constitution, rights to a
safe and stable lifestyle, a wholesome environment, and livelihood have been incorporated into the
Right to Life and Personal Liberty. The right to Intergenerational Equity is one such emerging right.
The Supreme Court of India read the right to intergenerational equity into Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution in the following cases. Since the current generation inherited the world from their
forefathers, they owe it to future generations to carry it on under the same condition. In State of
Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products17, the Supreme Court stated that “the present
generation has no right to imperil the safety and well-being of the next generation or the generations
to come thereafter.” The responsibility for future generations is the Indian concept of
intergenerational equity. The theory of intergenerational equity is stated in Principle 1 and Principle
213 of the Stockholm Declaration.

In Kinkri Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh 18, A PIL was filed claiming that unscientific and
unregulated lime stone quarrying had harmed the Shivalik Hills and posed a threat to the area's
biodiversity, climate, and residents. The Himachal Pradesh High Court said that if a fair balance
between growth and the environment is not achieved by proper natural resource exploitation,
Articles 14, 21, 48-A, and 51A (g) would be violated. Natural resources, the Court continued, must
be harnessed for the sake of social development. The tapping, though, must be done with care so that
the environment and atmosphere are not harmed. Natural resources are long-term human artefacts
that can not be destroyed in a single lifetime. The court issued an interim order in this case, ordering

17 12
A.I.R. 1996 S.C. 149 AIR 1988
HP
18
the state government to form a committee to examine the problem of proper mining lease granting
and the value of granting leases in light of environmental protection.

In K. Guruprasad Rao v. State of Karnataka19, The Court described the terms intergenerational
justice and sustainable growth. In this case, the appellant filed a PIL requesting that a mining lease
given to the respondent be cancelled and that mining be prohibited within a one-kilometer radius of
the Jambunatheswara Temple. According to the Court, sustainable growth requires the restoration
and conservation of historical and archaeological monumental wealth for future generations. The
right to growth encompasses the entire continuum of legal, educational, technological, political, and
social processes aimed at improving people's well-being and realizing their full potential. The
Supreme Court ruled in Court on Its Own Motion v. Union of India. The Supreme Court ruled in
Court on Its Own Motion v. Union of India that intergenerational equality is a part of Article 21 of
the Indian Constitution.

A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Naydu and Ors20.

Held as under: “The principle of inter-generational equity is of recent origin. The 1972 Stockholm
Declaration refers to it in principles 1and 2. In this context, the environment is viewed more as are
source basis for the survival of the present and future generations.
Principle 1 - Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in
an environment of quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being, and he bears a solemn
responsibility to protect and improve the environment for the present and future generations.
Principle 2 - The natural resources of the earth, including the air, water, lands, flora and fauna and
especially representative samples of natural ecosystems, must be safeguarded for the benefit of the
present and future generations through careful planning or management, as appropriate.”

Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India (The CRZ Notification Case21

The full Bench of the Supreme Court observed, “A law is usually enacted because the Legislature
feels that it is necessary. It is with a view to protect and preserve the environment and save it for the
future generations and to ensure good quality of life that the Parliament enacted the Anti-Pollution
Laws, namely, the Water Act, Air Act and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.”

19
(2013) 8 SCC 418
20
1999 (2) SCC 718
21
(1996) 5 SCC 281
Glanrock Estate v. State of Tamil Nadu22, the Supreme Court observed that:
“Forests in India are an important part of environment. They constitute national asset. In various
judgments of this Court delivered by the Forest Bench of this Court in the case of T.N. Godavarman
v. Union of India, it has been held that inter-generational equity is part of Article 21 of the
Constitution. What is inter-generational equity? The present generation is answerable to the next
generation by giving to the next generation a good environment. We are answerable to the next
generation and if deforestation takes place rampantly then intergenerational equity would stand
violated. The doctrine of sustainable development also forms part of Article 21 of the Constitution.
The precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle flow from the core value in Article 21.”

Several international agreements and treaties have accepted the aforementioned ideals of sustainable
development, and several imaginative proposals have been made, such as granting people or
organisations the locus standi to serve as agents of future generations or appointing an ombudsman
to protect future rights against present rights. The ideas outlined above are fully applicable to
environmental and ecological cases. The explanation why the Judiciary must interfere to establish
objective values and norms of intergenerational justice is that both the legislative and the executive
are only concerned with the current generation, since the current generation decides their political
fortunes and future. As a result, the Judiciary must do everything possible to protect future
generations' interests.
As a result, these values must be fully implemented in order to conserve the country's natural
resources. Article 48A of the Indian Constitution states that the government must work to conserve
and develop the atmosphere in order to protect the country's forests and wildlife. Article 51A of the
Indian Constitution states that it is the responsibility of any Indian resident, among other things, to
conserve and enhance the national climate, which includes forests, lakes, rivers, and wild life, as well
as to have respect for living beings. These two articles are not only fundamental in the country's
environmental governance, but it is also the State's responsibility to apply these principles in making
laws, and these two articles should be kept in mind when interpreting the scope and meaning of the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian
Constitution, as well as the vassal state. As can be seen from the above, the theory has been
enshrined in our constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the country, and no one may
override it.

22
[(2007) 2 SCC 1]
 CONCLUSION
At last, what I conclude is that, in the sustainability literature, intergenerational equity is almost
unanimously championed, and references to the desirability of intergenerational equity range from
broad allusions to detailed analyses. However, the treatment of intergenerational equity in these
discourses rarely includes discussion of restorative issues. This creates problems when the fields
discuss what from the present should be sustained into the future. Simply, if historical drivers of
present injustices are not specifically factored into understandings of the present, and preferences and
projections about the future, then they will affect (most likely negatively) the implementation of
those preferences and projections. Beginning the conversation about future generations in the present
does not adequately address the complexity of present ethical dynamics. To do so, we must
understand how those present injustices came to be over time and grapple with the challenge’s
history has bequeathed us.
The proposed principles recognize the right of each generation to use the Earth's resources for its
own benefit, but constraint he actions of the present generation in doing so. Within these constraints
they do not dictate how each generation should manage its resources. They do not require that the
present generation predict the preferences of future generations, which would be difficult if not
impossible. Rather, they try to ensure a reasonably secure and flexible natural resource base for
future generations that they can use to satisfy their own values and preferences. They are generally
shared by different cultural traditions and are generally acceptable to different economic and political
systems.
Intergenerational Equity is required due to undue human interference in natural systems. It can be
achieved through development on sustainable basis.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) United Nations Secretary-General

Intergenerational Solidarity and the Needs of Future Generations; A/68/322; United Nations:
New York, NY, USA, 15 August 2013.
2) Brown Weiss, E.
In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law; Intergenerational equity and rights of
future generations.
3) World Commission on Environment and Development
Our Common Future; Report Transmitted to the General Assembly by the Secretary-General
on 4 August 1987
4) World Commission on Environment and Development. Summary of Proposed Legal
Principles for Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development, adopted by the
WCED Experts Group on Environmental Law.
5) Bedear, S.
Responsibility and intergenerational equity
6) Collins, L.
Revisiting the Doctrine of Intergenerational Equity in Global Environmental Governance
7) Wolf, C.
Environmental ethics, future generations and environmental law
8) Oliveira, R.V.
Back to the Future: The Potential of Intergenerational Justice for the Achievement of the
Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2018