Fall 2021 End Semester Examination L-CT-0020 - Environmental Law

FALL 2021 END SEMESTER EXAMINATION

L-CT-0020 - ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

(BA LLB 2018, BBA LLB 2018 & LLB 2019)

MAXIMUM MARKS- 50 Time : 24 Hours

Please read the following instructions carefully before attempting the question paper.
1. There are 2 parts -Part A & Part B- in this question paper.
2. Part A carries 20 marks and is mandatory.
a. Word limit for Part A is 1500 words.
b. You may exceed the word limit by 10 % (i.e. maximum of 150 words).
c. This word limit is excluding the footnotes.
3. Part B has 4 questions carrying 10 marks each. You will have to attempt 3 questions.
a. Word limit for Part B is 500 words per question.
b. You may exceed the word limit by 10 % (i.e. maximum of 50 words).
c. This word limit is excluding the footnotes.
4. The total number of words in each answer must be mentioned at end.
5. Plagiarism will be dealt with strictly as per the University Guidelines.

PART A
(20 marks)

The question is mandatory. You may write a maximum of 1500 words excluding footnotes.
Exceeding the word limit is strictly discouraged, however an excess of word limit up to 10
% (i.e. excess of maximum150 words will be condoned.

Aravali Conservation Case – Constitution Bench

Matter reserved for final orders

In the year 2014, the first ever Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court
of India highlighting massive degradation that had been taking place in the fragile ecosystem
of Aravalis in the Districts of Gurugram, Faridabad, Alwar, Palwal and Rewari. The Supreme
Court intervened at numerous occasions through its interim orders. The litigation has now
reached its finality where the Constitution Bench has reserved the matter for final orders.

A brief background of the facts of this litigation are provided here:

The Ministry of Environment & Forests (MOEF), exercising the statutory powers given to it
under Section 3 of Environment Protection Act, 1986, had issued a notification in the year
1992 that prohibited certain activities in the Aravalis. These listed activities were in the
nature of industrialisation, construction, mining, electrification etc. The notification can be
accessed here: https://parivesh.nic.in/writereaddata/ENV/Eco-sensitiveZone/26.pdf. It must
be noted that the notification while prohibiting the listed set of activities from being carried
out in the Aravalis explicitly applied to the Districts of Gurgaon (now Gurugram) and Alwar
of Haryana and Rajasthan states respectively.

1
Fall 2021 End Semester Examination L-CT-0020 - Environmental Law

In the light of this matter related to the applicability of the said notification, a high-level
committee of the Haryana government headed by the Chief Secretary met last month and
issued a notification allowing construction and industrial activity in all the Districts covered
by Aravalis except that of Gurugram. The committee in its notification notes on record that
the 1992 notification only prohibits these activities in the District of Gurugram in Haryana
and does not apply to any other District of Haryana.

The committee notes in its notification, “It was observed that the MoFF&CC, being the only
legally competent authority, has rightly, in its wisdom issued notification (in 1992)… for the
then Gurgaon and Alwar districts only. Moreover, in case, the said Ministry at any stage
considers it appropriate to include other districts also under Aravalli notification, then the
same may be done by said authority… but as for now, the applicability of the 1992
notification does not extend to other Districts of Haryana than Gurugram”

Environmentalists have strongly objected to the committee’s findings, saying it will only
open up the region for construction activity. The Aravallis are spread across seven districts —
Gurugram, Mewat, Faridabad, Palwal, Mahendragarh, Rewari and Bhiwani. They are
extremely fragile in their ecosystem but have been under severe threat of illegal mining and
unauthorised construction. The Controller & Auditor General of India had also flagged grave
violations in the management of the Aravali region. A comprehensive newspaper report
summarising the CAG report can be accessed here:
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/ecological-degradation-in-aravallis-
alarming-cag-7233738/.

While this legal issue about the lawfulness of the Haryana Government notification is at the
centre of the pronouncement to be given by the Constitution Bench, there are additional
issues that came to the attention of the court during the proceedings. The matter was earlier
being heard by a three judge bench but was referred to this Constitution Bench since the final
pronouncement would involve questions of constitutional interpretation and reliance or
deviance from principles that have previously been set out by Constitution Benches (like
Oleum Gas Leak decision).

The court had appointed a special committee under the Chairmanship of Prof. Mashelkar.
The committee surveyed the Aravalis under question and reported to the court that even
before the notification by Haryana Government, there have been some groups of industries
that have been operating in the region and discharging effluents on the ground. It has reported
that an irreversible damage has already been caused by these industries. There is evidence
provided that points to corruption and abdication of duty by the State Pollution Control Board
(SPCB). The court is seized of these details in a sealed cover. Senior Advocate Aryama
Sundaram has submitted an affidavit on behalf of these industries in question. He has
objected to the jurisdiction of this court to deal with these industries even if there are alleged
violations. He asserts that the presence of a specific legislation in this regard and also a
specific, specialised tribunal (the National Green Tribunal) renders the Supreme Court short

2
Fall 2021 End Semester Examination L-CT-0020 - Environmental Law

of jurisdiction to deal with these industries. Therefore, this is another crucial matter the
Constitution Bench will have to conclusively pronounce upon.

You are the Supreme Court, heading this Constitution Bench, writing this judgement on
behalf of the bench. While discussing the jurisprudence set out by the Supreme Court in
environment protection matters over the last three decades; give a cogent, well-reasoned
decision on the legal issues stated above. Since you are heading a Constitution Bench, you
can take the liberty to be creative in your law application but with well explained reasons.

Part B
(10 x 3 = 30 marks)
Answer any 3 of the following questions. Each question carries 10 marks. You may write a
maximum of 500 words excluding footnotes. Exceeding the word limit is strictly
discouraged, however an excess of word limit up to 10 % (i.e. excess of maximum50 words
will be condoned.

QUESTION 1
(10 marks)

A group of retired forest officers believes that the right granted to the forest dwelling
scheduled tribes and other forest dwellers to occupy the forest land for habitation or for self-
cultivation under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of
Forest Rights) Act, 2006 will result into damage to forest. In furtherance they have
approached the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution of India to
declare the right as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has appointed you as the Amicus to
critically examine the rights and assist them in forming the decision. Substantiate your
arguments with provisions of law/judicial decisions.
The Supreme Court has appointed you as the Amicus to critically examine the rights and
assist them in forming the decision. Substantiate your arguments with provisions of
law/judicial decisions.
QUESTION 2
(10 marks)

A recent office memorandum[1] from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change (MoEF) – Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Division provides a procedure in its
clause 4, which deals with violations arising due to not obtaining a prior CRZ clearance for
permissible activities. Critically analyse how a post-facto approval for industrial setup in a
coastal area, i.e. inclusive of wildlife and livelihood, would affect the objectives set out by
the Environment Protection Act (EPA) and the zoning regulations.

QUESTION 3
(10 marks)

The Supreme Court of India has spent years trying to curb pollution. In this process they have
contributed to the development of environmental jurisprudence in India. However it has been
alleged that the Supreme Court is not aware of the ground realities. Discuss

3
Fall 2021 End Semester Examination L-CT-0020 - Environmental Law

QUESTION 4
(10 marks)

It is often argued that had it not been for the role played by judiciary, environmental
protection laws in India would not have been the same. Has the constitution of the National
Green Tribunal (NGT) made any difference to this role? Discuss in light of the powers
granted to the NGT.

--