Ans.

Case Facts:

1. Because of years of wastewater discharge from the dyeing plants, Noyyal became poisoned.

2. Pollution standards were ignored when vast manufacturing of knitwear was required to meet
massive demand from Europe and the United States and spur economic expansion.

3. Units used to discharge poisonous water late at night, flouting all pollution control board rules
(and, of course, business moral ethics).

4. Toxic water eventually reached the agricultural areas, causing them to become barren.

5. A high court order resulted in the closure of 654 units, putting employees out of employment.

6. Thousands of farmers were compelled to relocate to cities in search of unskilled labour.

Containing and preventing water loss is a key ethical concern. The moral principle of sustainability
serves as the guiding ethical standard in this case. The rate of human-caused water loss and
contamination must not exceed the water source's ability to cleanse and replenish itself, according
to this theory.

The three components of company sustainability are social, economic, and environmental. The role
of businesses in resolving all three of these issues is determined by the management practises in
place.

The following are some crucial facts to remember in this case:

• Over the last few decades, Tirupur's progressive industrialisation into a textile town has resulted in
increased pollution as the soil, water, and air all degraded.

• The government did not take measures to control pollution during the initial period, and those
who were dependent on the river did not realise the consequences of the pollution.

• If measures had been taken at an earlier stage, there would not have been the severe
consequences that now confront this textile town and its surroundings.

• As a result, the Noyyal has become a dumping ground for effluents, and all settlements along this
belt are protesting about the pollution. The effluents have poisoned the groundwater and depleted
agricultural land.

Groups Affected

The dirty and contaminated water has a significant impact on a number of populations.

• Water used for irrigation was contaminated. The colour of the water began to change, and many
people who drank this contaminated water developed significant water-borne illnesses.

• The land was heavily contaminated, resulting in a low yield.

• The sewage water destroyed fish, putting fishermen's livelihoods at risk.

• Animals that drank the tainted water, particularly cattle living near the riverbed, were impacted.

As a result, practically all stakeholders who lived near the river or were reliant on it had to relocate.
Concerns about unemployment were also raised.
The traditional discourse on environmental law has focused on the judiciary's interaction with
environmental law, which has resulted in a lot of superficial analysis that is disconnected from the
reality of environmental governance. With poor enforcement of environmental laws in all
jurisdictions and the environment's state deteriorating by the day, it's become necessary to
investigate the governing rule of law, which serves as a foundation for enviro-legal control
throughout the world.