BABASAHEB BHIMRAO AMBEDKAR

UNIVERSITY

SUBMITTED TO- SUBMITTED BY-

DR RAJ KUMAR PARICHETA KISHAN CHATURVEDI

SUBJECT: ENVIORMENTAL LAW. (LB-705)

CLASS: BBA. LL. B(VII)
TOPIC: Fundamental right and Environment protection
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The project on “LEGISLATION” is a result of co-operation,

hardwork & good wishes of many people.
I student of “Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar university”
would like to thank our subject lecturer DR. Raj Kumar
Paricheta for his involvement in my project and providing me
with valuable guidance throughout my study.I his fulfils his
expectation.
 INTRODUCTIONS

Environment and life are interrelated. The existence of life on

earth depends on the harmonious relationship between
ecosystem and environment. Especially homo-sapiens have
very close interaction with nature. Human beings are at the
centre of concerns for sustainable development and that they
are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with
nature. So, It is important to recognize know why Natural
resources such as air, water, and land are fundamental to all
life forms.
Environment and Indian Constitution

The Constitution of India did not include any specific

provision relating to environment protection. The
environmental problems being faced now in the country were
not visualized by the framers of the Constitution. However,
the past five decades have witnessed two major developments
in this connection. The first development took place with
(Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, was adopted in the
mid-seventies. Specific provisions relating to certain aspects
of the environment, more especially for the protection of the
forests and wildlife in the country, were incorporated in Part
IV- Directive Principles of the State Policy - and List III - The
Concurrent List - of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.
As a result, the Constitution has now the following provisions
specifically relating to environment protection and nature
conservation: Part IV: Directive Principles of State Policy
(Article 48A): Protection and improvement and safeguarding
of forests and wild life. Part IV-A: Fundamental Duties
(Article 51-A): It shall be the duty of every citizen of India -
(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including
forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for
living creatures. Seventh Schedule (Article 246) List III -
Concurrent List no. 17 Prevention of cruelty to animals, Item
no. 17A Forests, Item no. 17B Protection of wild animals and
birds.
 Article 21 and Right to Pollution free
environment

The second major development has been from certain

remarkable judicial pronouncements in recent years, more
specially relating to Article 21 of the Constitution dealing
with 'the right to life'. It protects the life and personal liberty.
It envisages and aims that no person shall be deprived of his
life or personal liberty except to a procedure established by
law. Here, right to life includes right to health, right to food,
right to pollution free environment, etc. In simple words,
Article 21 provides an inbuilt guarantee to a person for right
to live with human dignity.Right to life scope’s has been
extended to include right to wholesome environment and right
to sustainable development. Environmental deterioration can
endanger life of present and future generations. The right to
healthy environment has been incorporated, directly or
indirectly, into the judgments of the court. These rights have
been implicitly recognized as constitutional rights. Thus it is
clear that article 21 has a multidimensional interpretation.
 Judicial Interpretation to Right to Life
and Environment.

The right to healthy environment has been incorporated,

directly or indirectly, into the judgments of the court. Link
between environmental quality and the right to life was first
addressed by a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court in
the Charan Lal Sahu vs Union of India. Subhash Kumar v.
State of Bihar, the Court observed that 'right to life guaranteed
by article 21 includes the right of enjoyment of pollution-free
water and air for full enjoyment of life.' Through this case, the
court recognized the right to a wholesome environment as part
of the fundamental right to life. This case also indicated that
the municipalities and a large number of other concerned
governmental agencies could no longer rest content with
unimplemented measures for the abatement and prevention of
pollution. This was reaffirmed in M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India.The case concerned the deterioration of the world
environment and the duty of the state government, under
article 21, to ensure a better quality of environment. The
Supreme Court has held that life, public health and ecology
have priority over unemployment and loss of revenue. The
Supreme Court ordered the Central government to show the
steps they have taken to achieve this goal through national
policy and to restore the quality of environment. In Virender
Gaur v. State of Haryana where it was held that enjoyment of
life and right to live with dignity includes the protection and
preservation of the environment and without it, life could not
be enjoyed.
 Right To Equality and Environmental
Protection

Equality before the law and equal protection of the law has
been granted under Article 14 of the Constitution. This
fundamental right impliedly casts a duty upon the state to be
fair while taking actions in regard to environmental protection
and thus, cannot infringe article 14. The judiciary has played a
strict role in disallowing the arbitrary use of discretionary
powers without measuring the interest of the public.
In Bangalore Medical Trust V. B.S Muddappa, an
improvement scheme was prepared by the City Improvement
Board of Bangalore for the purpose of extending the city. A
low-level park was to be developed for which an area was
kept under this scheme. But under the direction of the chief
minister the area kept for the low-level park was to be
converted into the civic amenity site where the hospital was to
be constructed. As soon as the construction began, the
residents moved to the Supreme Court. By explaining the
importance of open spaces and parks in the development of
urban areas, the Supreme Court stated that the open spaces,
recreation, playing grounds and protection of ecology are the
matters of vital importance in the interest of public and crucial
for the development. Keeping open spaces for the interest of
the public is justified cannot be sold or given on lease to any
private person solely for the sake of monetary gains.
 Freedom of Trade and Commerce and
Environmental Protection

All the citizens of India have a fundamental right to carry on

any profession or business, trade or commerce at any place
within the territory of India under Article 19 (1) (g) of the
Constitution. But ,Article 19(6) of the Constitution lays down
the reasonable restriction to this fundamental right to avoid
the environmental hazards.
In M.C Mehta v. Union of India, The tanneries were
discharging effluents in the holy river Ganga which was
causing water pollution. It was held by the court to stop the
tanneries from working because the effluents drained were ten
times more noxious as compared to the ordinary sewage water
which flows into the river. In M.C Mehta v. Union of India,
1994, it was directed by the Supreme Court that the industries
which did not comply or adhere to, with the prior direction of
the court regarding the installation of air pollution controlling
system should be closed as it is violative of Article 19(6) of
the Constitution. In S. Jagannath v. Union of India, sea
beaches and sea coasts were considered to be the gifts of
nature, by the Supreme Court and any such activity which
pollutes these natural resources or the gift of nature cannot be
permitted to function. The court further held that before the
installation of any such industry in a fragile coastal area it is
essential for them to necessarily pass the strict environmental
test. In other words, reasonable restrictions can be laid in
accordance with Article 19(6) of the Constitution.
 Conclusion
These article begins with laying down emphasis on
why environmental protection is necessary, why
did a need arise to protect the environment
followed by the causes of ecological degradation
in the introductory part. Various reasons have been
considered to be a major factor in polluting the
environment and affecting the lives of the people
and posing a great threat to other living beings of
the country.
Fundamental rights are essential and cannot be
infringed upon but in accordance with the
reasonable restrictions can be dealt with. A
number of landmark cases have been mentioned to
make the concept even clearer and how this
plethora of judgements have clearly mentioned the
importance to protect the environment. It can also
be concluded that the supreme court has played a
major role in laying down the environmental
jurisprudence.