CASE ANALYSIS ON

“VELLORE CITIZENS WELFARE FORUM V. UNION OF

INDIA [(1996) 5 SCC 647]”

SUBMITTED TO: MR. ANURAG SHARMA SIR

SUBJECT : ENVIRONMENT LAW

SUBMITTED BY : ASHWINA NAMTA

ENROLLMENT NO. 18FLICDDN02034

SUBMISSION DATE: 09/04/2023

ICFAI LAW SCHOOL

THE ICFAI UNIVERSITY, DEHRADUN

 Acknowledgement

First of all I would like to take this opportunity with esteem privilege to express my heartfelt
thanks and gratitude to my course teacher Mr. Anurag Sharma Sir, for having faith in me
and awarding me this very significant project topic of such importance. His consistent
supervision, constant inspiration and invaluable guidance have been of immense help in
carrying out the project work with success.

Next, I would like to thank my colleagues for lending me a helping hand during the shaping
up of the project; subsequently I would like to thank my university for allowing me to avail
the computer lab and internet facilities without which this project would have been in a
distant realm.

I extend my heartfelt thanks to my family and friends for their moral support and
encouragement. I also take this opportunity to thank all those people who contribute in their
own small ways but fail to get a mention.

ASHWINA NAMTA

18FLICDDN02034
 VELLORE CITIZENS WELFARE FORUM V. UNION OF
INDIA [(1996) 5 SCC 647]

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided On: April 7th 2016
Bench: Justice Kuldip Singh, Justice Faizan Uddin, Justice K. Venkataswami
Citation: [AIR (1996) SC 2715]: [(1996) 5 SCC 647]
Appellants: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forums
Respondents: Union of India rep. by its Secretary, Department of Environment
and Others

FACTS OF THE CASE1

1. There was a NGO named as ‘Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum’, it has filed a Public
Interest Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution concerning severe pollution of
soil and water which was causing due to discharge of untreated sewage water from
900 tyrannies built in 5 districts of Tamil Nadu.
2. The Palar River in Tamil Nadu which was main Source of potable water in that area,
used for consumption and irrigation was completely polluted due to this tyrannies.
And it is on the verge of extinct now.
3. Then a survey of sewage water was done and also area near tyrannies was checked
and it was found that 176 different types chemicals are present in the tyrannies water.
35,000 hectares of land near the tannery was declared unfit for cultivation. Also water
of 350 wells present that area was declared unsafe for consumption.
4. Also order of the Tamil Nadu Pollution control board to built a effluent plant for
proper disposal of effluents was left unheard

ISSUES :
1. Whether Principles such as polluter based principle and precautionary principle which
are the important part of sustainable development holds any place in Indian law?
2. Up to what extent we can compromise environment safety for future economic
development?

1
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India [(1996) 5 SCC 647]
 3. Whether tanneries should be allowed to keep on working at expense of life of lakhs of
people residing there?

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED:
By The Petitioner:
According to the petitioner, the whole surface and subsoil water of the river Palar has
been contaminated, resulting in the inaccessibility of consumable water to the residents of the
region. It is stated that tanneries in the state of Tamil Nadu have degraded the ecology in the
zone. An independent research done by Peace Members, a non-governmental organization,
encompassing 13 towns of Dindigal and Peddiar Chatram Anchayat Unions, reveals that 350
wells out of 467 used for drinking and water system purposes have been polluted.

By The Respondent:
The advocates from the side of the tanneries argued that the quality concerning Total
Dissolved Solids (TDS) fixed by the Board wasn't legitimized. This Court by the request
dated April 9, 1996, coordinated the NEERI to examine this angle and offer its input. In its
report, NEERI has legitimized the models stipulated by the Board. The Ministry of
Environment and Forests has not completely set down models for inland surface water
release for Total Dissolved Solids, sulphates, and chlorides. the selection on these guidelines
rests with the individual State Pollution Control Boards in line with the prerequisites
supported nearby site conditions. The rules stipulated by Tamil Nadu Pollution Board Control
(TNPCB) have been advocated.

JUDGMENT

 The Supreme Court after hearing both the parties and examining the report ruled to
maintain a harmony between environment and development.
 The Court observed that these Tanneries are the major foreign exchange earner to the
country and also provide employment to several people. But at the same time, it
harms the environment and poses a health hazard to everyone.
 The Court ruled in favour of Petitioners and directed all the Tanneries to deposit a
sum of rupees ten thousand in the office of Collector as fine. The Court further
directed the State of Tamil Nadu to award Mr M. C. Mehta with a sum of Rupees
Fifty thousand as a token of appreciation towards his efforts in protecting the
environment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also made it a point to emphasize on the
 formation of green benches in dealing with matters related to the protection of the
environment.
ANALYSIS :

 As per the preamble of the Environment Act, its main aim is to establish an authority
under section 3(3)2 of the Act to secure the environment by controlling contamination
of the environment.
 But, unfortunately there is no such authority established till date consisting of the
Central Government to control the contamination of the environment.This work of
establishing an authority has to be done by an expert. But as it is not the case, it is
being accomplished by the Supreme Court through the above case.
 If the tanneries are allowed to proceed with their work in five regions of Tamil Nadu
then all waterways will be contaminated and the occupants of the territory will be
exposed to infections. Thus, it was important for the court to guide the Central
Government to make prompt moves under the provisions of the Environment Act.
 Every individual is entitled to natural air, clean water and a contamination-free
environment.

CONCURRING OPINION :

This is one of the landmark judgments given by the Supreme Court of India on the matters of
protection of environment. The Supreme Court applied the concept of Sustainable
development while passing judgement on the said matter. It applied this concept through the
polluter pays principle and the precautionary principle.

Thus by keeping this view of balancing industrial development and environmental protection
in mind, the court ruled out accordingly. Also, by keeping the polluter pay principle in mind
the court ordered the fine. 

CONCLUSION
This case is in relation to environment protection but it holds equal importance in corporate
law too. Economic benefit is very important for industries but securing environmental is the
need of today’s hours. This case gave the concept of sustainable. development which strikes
balance between both. This case ultimately shows that environment could not be
compromised at any cost.

2
The Environment (Protection) Act,1986, Section 3(3)